HOW FAR IS THE EUROPEAN NEIGHBOURHOOD POLICY A

SUBSTANTIAL OFFER FOR MOLDOVA?

SERGIU BUŞCANEANU

LEEDS, AUGUST 2006

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT …………………………………………………………………………….. 3
GLOSSARY …………………………………………………………………………….. 4
I.

INTRODUCTION ……………………………………………………………….. 5

II.

EUROPEAN NEIGHBOURHOOD POLICY ……………………………………..... 9
1. The ENP – general considerations ………………………………………... 9
2. The development of the ENP ……………………………………………... 10

III.

2.1.

The origins of the ENP ……………………………………………. 10

2.2.

‘Wider Europe’ Communication …………………………………. 11

2.3.

European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument …………... 13

2.4.

ENP Strategy Paper ………………………………………………. 14

2.5.

ENP Action Plans ………………………………………………… 14

NEGOTIATION PROCESS ON THE EU-MOLDOVA ACTION PLAN ……………... 17
1. Rounds of negotiations ………………………………………………….... 17
2. Signing the EU-Moldova Action Plan …………………………………..... 21

IV.

THE ENP – A ‘POTEMKIN VILLAGE’ FOR MOLDOVA? ……………………….. 22
1. EU-Moldova PCA & Action Plan – brief overviews …………………....... 22
1.1.

EU-Moldova PCA ……………………………………………….... 22

1.2.

EU-Moldova Action Plan …………………………………………. 25

2. EU-Moldova PCA & Action Plan – comparative display ……………....... 27
3. The added value of the EU-Moldova Action Plan ………………………... 32
V.

IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING OF THE EU-MOLDOVA ACTION PLAN ... 38
1. Main achievements ……………………………………………………….. 38
2. Government of the Republic of Moldova ………………………………… 39
3. Civil society ………………………………………………………………. 43
4. European institutions ……………………………………………………… 43

VI.

CONCLUSIONS ………………………………………………………………… 45

VII.

APPENDICES …………………………………………………………………... 49

VIII. BIBLIOGRAPHY ……………………………………………………………….. 55

2

ABSTRACT

The present paper aims to contribute to the debate on the extent to which the ENP is a
substantial offer for Moldova or whether the ENP can be rather seen as a ‘Potemkin village’. For
this purpose, the main part of the paper proceeds in three moves. In the first instance it provides
brief overviews of the EU-Moldova PCA and Action Plan. Secondly, it provides a comparative
display of the content of these two documents and thirdly, on the basis of this display, it makes an
analysis of the new partnership perspectives envisaged by the EU-Moldova Action Plan. All
these three moves and the comparative method employed envisage mainly the political dimension
of these documents.
Comparing the EU-Moldova PCA and Action Plan some could argue that the latter is a
‘Potemkin village’ for Moldova, as its final objectives do not consider the opening of a clear
European perspective for Moldova. However, the ENP and EU-Moldova Action Plan reinforced
the relations between the EU and Moldova, brought a new dynamics in their bilateral dialogue,
and opened up new co-operation perspectives. For the time being a full exploitation of these
perspectives stands crucial for the European destiny of Moldova. However, this is far to be
enough. Moldova should go beyond the declared objectives of the Action Plan. It has to start on
its own the gradual adoption of the acquis communautaire.

3

Development and Stabilization Central and Eastern European Countries Central European Free Trade Agreement Common Foreign and Security Policy Centre for Human Rights of Moldova Commonwealth of Independent States Council of Europe Directorate-General European Community European Court for Human Rights European Economic Area European Economic Community European Investment Bank European Integration Department European Neighbourhood Agreement European Neighbourhood Policy European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument European Parliament European Union European Atomic Energy Community Free Trade Area General Affairs and External Relations Council General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade Ministry of Foreign Affairs Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European Integration National Commission for European Integration Newly Independent States Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe Partnership and Co-operation Agreement Republic of Moldova South-East European Co-operation Process Stability Pact for South Eastern Europe Technical Assistance to the Commonwealth of Independent States Technical Assistance and Information Exchange Instrument United Kingdom Union of Soviet Socialist Republics 4 .GLOSSARY AA ADEPT ADR ALA programme CARDS CEEC CEFTA CFSP CHRM CIS CoE DG EC ECHR EEA EEC EIB EID ENA ENP ENPI EP EU EURATOM FTA GAER Council GATT MFA MFAEI NCEI NIS ODIHR OSCE PCA RM SEECP SPSEE TACIS TAIEX UK USSR Association Agreement Association for Participatory Democracy Alliance for Democracy and Reforms Assistance programme for Asian and Latin American developing countries Community Assistance for Reconstruction.

this document was signed in November 1994. the technical assistance through this program was a standalone activity. the EC committed itself to support their political and economic transformation. On the other side. After two intention letters addressed by Moldovan President Mircea Snegur to the Presidents of the Council and European Commission expressing the will of Moldovan side to negotiate a PCA with the EU. the Republic of Moldova (RM) had also to redefine its relations with the external world. the external actors had also to adapt themselves to the new international architecture. due to a gradual development and formalization of their bilateral relations through new legal frameworks – Partnership and Co-operation Agreements (PCAs). the second Moldovan President Petru Lucinschi expressed by successive official letters addressed to the President of the European Commission Jacques Santer and to all EU heads of 5 . Benita Ferrero-Waldner I. Moldova found itself in a totally new reality. Along with the establishment of the new diplomatic relations with the former soviet republics. brought by the dissolution of the USSR. INTRODUCTION After the implosion of the USSR in 1991. The European Community (EC) was not an exception in this sense. The EC TACIS programme became thus the main instrument which aimed at enhancing the transition process in all former soviet republics. Along with the establishment of its state institutions and with undertaking a complex process of reforms. Caucasus and Central Asia. When TACIS was initiated in 1991. Later it became part of a more complex policy approach of the European Union (EU) towards countries in Eastern Europe. except Baltic States. While the EUMoldova PCA was passing through a cumbersome ratification procedure by the EU member states.‘The inherent limits of enlargement make our European Neighbourhood Policy even more important’.

aimed at the elaboration of the European Integration Strategy of the Republic of Moldova. despite the reticent attitude of the EU towards the European aspirations of Moldova. Sturza Government has been resigned. The EU-Moldova PCA entered into force in 1998. which did not impede however Moldova to become in 2001 a member of the Stability Pact for SouthEastern Europe (SPSEE) – a regional co-operation project complementary to the European integration process –. in November 2002. providing thus a new contractual relationship between the Parties concerned and setting out a co-operation framework in a broad spectrum of policy areas. One year later. due to the frictions inside the ADR. setting up the European Integration Department (EID) within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA). renaming of the MFA into the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European Integration (MFAEI). Later the establishment of the Parliamentary Commission for European Integration. the European dimension of Moldova’s foreign policy started to come back gradually to the top of its external relations agenda. nor negative answers followed. establishment of ministerial and departmental subdivisions in charge of European integration. Sturza Government appointed by the ruling parliamentary coalition Alliance for Democracy and Reforms (ADR) was the first Moldovan Cabinet which declared European integration as its main foreign policy priority. Only after a three years period of an incoherent to some degree foreign policy.states and governments the aspiration of Moldova to become an associate member of the EU. The starting point of this surprising in that time return to the pro-EU rhetoric could be largely considered the establishment by the President Vladimir Voronin. 6 . However. Nevertheless. approval of the Concept of European Integration of the Republic of Moldova. fact which undermined substantially the diplomatic efforts of Moldova on its way to European integration. of the National Commission for European Integration (NCEI). neither positive.

The main part of the paper aims to contribute to the debate on the extent to which the ENP is a substantial offer for Moldova or whether the ENP can be rather seen as a ‘Potemkin village’. which considers the articulation of the ENP and the main developments of this policy area. hardly and hesitantly accepted by the ruling Party of Communists. preparing itself for its ‘big-bang’ enlargement to the East and South. the EU. For this purpose the paper employs the comparative method. to avoid drawing new dividing lines in Europe. the EU launched the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) which articulates a revised policy approach towards sixteen countries in the EU neighbourhood. 2003a). The next chapter looks at the negotiation process on the EUMoldova Action Plan. while its enlargement already brought it closer to potentially unstable regions. The present paper approaches the political dimension of the co-operation process between the EU and Moldova within the ENP.etc. and to promote stability and prosperity within and beyond the new borders of the Union (European Commission. the paper provides an overview of the ENP. has been showing an increasing interest in the development of a new policy approach towards its future neighbours. Few days after its fifth enlargement wave in May 2004. The main vehicle for taking the ENP forward is the Action Plans. On the other hand. The ENP is thus a response to the extension of the EU’s borders and to the limits of this extension. The method is used for a 7 . The main research question to be answered by this paper is: How far is the ENP a substantial offer for Moldova? Before addressing this question. As the EU cannot enlarge ad infinitum. The EUMoldova Action Plan was signed in February 2005. the ENP attempts in normative terms: to develop a friendly neighbourhood and a zone of prosperity with the EU neighbours. – came to add credibility to the re-orientation in the field of external relations. documents which come to enhance the multi-dimensional dialogue between the EU and its neighbours.

comparative approach of the EU-Moldova PCA and Action Plan. 8 . The final part of the paper looks at some aspects regarding the implementation and monitoring of the Action Plan. The approach envisages mainly the political dimension of these two documents and seeks to find out what new co-operation opportunities brings on this dimension the EU-Moldova Action Plan in comparison with the PCA? Thus. these non-political areas of co-operation fall aside the specific tasks of the present paper. However. social and cultural fields of co-operation between the EU and Moldova would add an important contribution to the central debate of this paper. An additional focus on economic. the only focus on the political dimension of the EU-Moldova co-operation process could be seen as a limitation in exploring the main research question.

EUROPEAN NEIGHBOURHOOD POLICY 1. In line with the EU pragmatism. 2004. and securing itself from the effects of these problems. 2006). 2005. Another significant aspect of the ENP is its Europeanization dimension. 2003). However. the ENP does not close any doors to European countries that may at some future point wish to apply for membership (Verheugen. although it is not about enlargement. the EU is attempting to Europeanize not only the political community of states that it represents. the most important reason for the ENP’s designing represents the security interests of the enlarged EU (Stetter.II. the ENP is founded on the premise that ‘by helping our neighbours we help ourselves’ (Ferrero-Waldner. 2005c. Tied with the above rationale. 2004). As Scott (2005) remarks. the ENP can be seen as ‘a form of 9 . the ENP could be seen as an alternative to the EU enlargement. As Smith (2005) remarks. Ferrero-Waldner. 2005). and (c) transformation (Europeanization) of the states in the neighbourhood in accordance with common European values and with the benefits of progressive integration. Scott. Del Sarto and Schumacher. 2005. at least for the time being. (b) contributing to the diminishing of the problems in the neighbourhood. 2004. Thus. 2004). Lavenex. In this context. the ENP was launched to address the ‘enlargement fatigue’ of the EU. The ENP – general considerations In pragmatic terms the ENP represents for the EU a way to safeguard three foreign policy priorities as regards to its neighbourhood: (a) staying away from new accessions in the near to medium term (Johansson-Nogués. but also the greater regional space around it. Landaburu. The December 2003 European Security Strategy points out to the same strategic interest of the EU and declare the ‘building security in [the] neighbourhood’ as one of three strategic objectives of the EU (Solana.

European Council in Copenhagen. 2. in August 2002. The development of the ENP 2. some observers question whether the envisaged ENP mechanisms of Europeanization in the EU’s neighbourhood will work in the absence of membership as a target (Cremona. Lynch. In this context. Moldova and Belarus ‘with the 10 .external governance’ which consists in the extension of the EU’s values. including Action Plans with agreed reform targets. 2002c.1. long-term and integrated approach towards’ Ukraine. 2004). The origins of the ENP The origins of the ENP date to early 2002 when some Northern member states. Soon after. As a result. based on the EEA model. The General Affairs and External Relations (GAER) Council of the EU stated at its meeting in November 2002 that ‘enlargement presents an important opportunity to take forward relations with the new neighbours of the EU which should be based on shared political and economic values’. a joint letter to the Council by the Commission and High Representative for CFSP expressed the necessity of a ‘wider Europe initiative’ to be aimed at future EU’s Eastern neighbours. The EU uses in designing the ENP some instruments derived from the pre-accession process. 2004). 2002). standards and policies. The GAER Council has also remarked the ‘need for the EU to formulate an ambitious. that would be ‘as close to the Union as can be without being a member’ (Cremona. The way in which the EU is doing this resembles the strategy it has applied during enlargement. 2004. different European institutions have reiterated successively this necessity (Council of the EU. asked the Commission to make proposals to mitigate the exclusion effects of the imminent enlargement for Ukraine. Moldova and Belarus. elements of conditionality and regular monitoring in order to achieve a high level of integration. while precluding the access to its fundamental institutions. especially the UK. 2002b.

Morocco. thus helping to ensure greater stability and prosperity at and beyond the new borders of the Union’(Council of the EU. Lebanon. In accordance with the decision of the Copenhagen European Council. The document states that the overall goal of the new Neighbourhood Policy would be working with the above partner countries to foster the political and economic reform process. Syria. Palestinian Authority. 2003a). The Copenhagen European Council of December 2002 endorsed the GAER Council conclusions and added that the EU ‘remains determined to avoid new dividing lines in Europe’ and included the southern Mediterranean countries to be regarded by the new neighbourhood initiative as well. Libya. Belarus. Egypt. sustainable development and trade. Russian Federation. Tunisia and Ukraine – countries that do not have the perspective of membership of the EU. Moldova. Jordan. In relation to this. the Communication refers to the Union’s relations with Algeria. The European Council welcomed also the intention of the Commission and the High Representative for CFSP to prepare more detailed proposals on how to take this initiative further (European Council in Copenhagen. Israel. the Communication stipulates: ‘a response to the practical issues posed by proximity and neighbourhood should be seen as separate from the question of EU accession’. 2002). 2. 2002c). ‘Wider Europe’ Communication In March 2003 the Commission presented its Communication to the Council and the European Parliament Wider Europe – Neighbourhood: A New Framework for Relations with our Eastern and Southern Neighbours (European Commission.2. The GAER Council has mentioned as well as that the ‘new neighbourhood initiative’ should be seen in conjunction with the EU’s strong commitment to deepen the co-operation with Russia.objective of promoting democratic and economic reforms. 11 .

etc. sustainable development. the EU would offer to its neighbours a range of opportunities. energy and telecommunications networks. greater efforts to promote human rights. The document specifies that the EU’s engagement would be introduced progressively.promote closer economic integration. New benefits would be offered to reflect the progress made by each partner countries in political and economic reform. promoting sustainable economic and social development of the border regions and pursuing regional and transnational co-operation’ (European Commission. (Ibidem). greater EU political involvement in conflict prevention and crisis management. Thus. integration into transport. the EU’s attitude may even lead to discrimination instead of differentiated co-operation. The logic of the document is well-known: in return for concrete progress demonstrating shared values and effective implementation of political. which would focus ‘on ensuring the smooth functioning and secure management of the future Eastern and Mediterranean borders. Another element of the Communication is the possibility of creating a new Neighbourhood Instrument. liberalisation of the free movement of persons. 2003b). 12 . the main instruments in approaching the EU’s relations with its neighbours within the new Neighbourhood Policy would be the Action Plans. According to the ‘wider Europe’ Communication. services and capital. Del Sarto and Schumacher (2005) remark that as ‘wider Europe’ puts very different countries in one ‘basket’. new sources of finance. economic and institutional reforms. preferential trading relations. enhanced assistance. and provide political support and assistance. a stake in the EU’s Internal Market. In opposition with the positive spirit of these principles. the progressivity and differentiation are seen as the defining principles of the new Neighbourhood Policy. co-operation to prevent and combat common security threats. and would be conditional on meeting agreed targets for reform. goods. such as: closer economic integration with the EU.

TACIS. An initial phase from 2004-2006 would focus on improving the co-ordination between the various financing instruments within the existing legislative and financial framework. promote sustainable development and poverty reduction.The GAER Council in June 2003 welcomed the ‘wider Europe’ Communication and invited the Commission to present another Communication on the concept of a new Neighbourhood Instrument (Council of the EU. 13 . Likewise. PHARE. 2003b). Taking into account the short-term constraints in the coordination between existing financial instruments – INTERREG. The Brussels European Council of October 2003 welcomed the Communication on the new Neighbourhood Instrument and urged the Council and the Commission to take this initiative forward. the Commission has made a detailed analysis of the elements which could be included within the renamed European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI).3. address security and stability challenges posed by geographical proximity to the EU. 2. and will support the implementation of the ENP Action Plans. The Thessaloniki European Council of June 2003 endorsed these conclusions. On this basis. In a second phase. for the period after 2006. 2003). it was decided that the ENPI will encourage economic integration and political cooperation between the EU and the neighbours. CARDS and MEDA – the Communication proposes that a two-step approach should be adopted. European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument In July 2003 the Commission issued the Communication Paving the way for a New Neighbourhood Instrument. the Commission would propose a new Neighbourhood Instrument addressing the ‘common challenges’ identified in the ‘wider Europe’ Communication (European Commission. The document provides an assessment of the possibilities of creating a new Neighbourhood Instrument.

and finally to ‘European Neighbourhood Policy’. Morocco. Azerbaijan and Georgia – in the ENP (European Commission. 2004a).4. For a debate on these terms see Emerson. 2. Jordan.5. The document was designed to map out the next steps in carrying forward the European Neighbourhood Policy1. The name of the initiative aimed towards the EU neighbours has been changed as many times as the list of neighbours included in it: from ‘wider Europe initiative’ to ‘new neighbourhood initiative/ policy’.The Commission has proposed €14. 14 .929 million available resources to the ENPI for the 2007-2013 financial perspective (See Appendix 1). Palestinian Authority. 2003b. while the external action budget itself accounts for less than 10 per cent of the EU’s total budget. 2003a. The Communication proposed to define. whose fulfilment will bring them closer to the EU. a set of priorities. In this context. 2004a). 2005. together with partner countries. Emerson and Noutcheva. The Brussels European Council of June 2004 welcomed the ENP Strategy Paper and accepted the inclusion of the Southern Caucasus in the ENP. ENP Action Plans In December 2004 the European Commission has launched the first seven Action Plans under the ENP with Israel. ENP Strategy Paper In May 2004 European Commission issued the Communication European Neighbourhood Policy Strategy Paper (European Commission. Smith (2005) observes that the total expenditure on the ENPI would be just over 15 per cent of spending on external action. 2. Tunisia and 1. the ENP Strategy Paper refers to the ENPI and contains recommendations concerning the inclusion of the countries of the Southern Caucasus – Armenia. Apart from this. Moldova.

In the light of progress made in implementing the AA. before the appointment of the Barroso Commission. their needs and capacities. the initial link to the enlargement staff in the Commission had an evident impact on the content and method of the ENP. 2005. 2004a). freedom. external security. In this context. even though it was clearly stated that the ENP does not imply a membership prospect. Emerson. Algeria will be able to request full participation in the ENP and to commence negotiations for an Action Plan. as well as common interests (European Commission. 2005). ‘pressing governments to implement democratic reforms’ is difficult if those governments view such reforms as threatening their own hold on power. they are drawn on a common set of principles and have a similar structure. Georgia and Lebanon2. setting out comprehensive sets of priorities in political. It is expected that the next group of Action Plans will be concluded with Armenia. the ENP was transferred to the management of the External Relations DG. Therefore.Ukraine. Despite the differences in the precise agendas for each neighbouring state. 3. preferring to develop with the EU on a more ‘equal’ basis four ‘common spaces’: economic. security and justice. After the appointment of the Barroso Commission. Azerbaijan. and research and education. They underline the primary importance of the respect for democratic values and human rights. add Emerson and Noutcheva (2005). Emerson and Noutcheva. though no formal request has been made. Del Sarto and Schumacher. they are differentiated and have been ‘tailor made’ (Ferrero-Waldner. joining the Barcelona Process would open up to it the opportunity to work more closely with the EU under the ENP. This is specifically the case of the Arab neighbouring countries. Egypt. Concluding ENP Action Plans with Belarus and Syria depends upon their will and democratic developments in these countries. the ‘work [on Action Plans] was indeed done by the Commission’s Enlargement department’3. reflecting the existing state of relations with partner countries. Therefore. In 1999 Libya was invited to join the Barcelona Process and in 2004 it indicated its intention to join. Emerson (2004) observes that. which seems to be derived from the experience of the accession negotiation process (Cremona. These Action Plans have been individually negotiated and jointly agreed with the above seven countries. 2004. 2004. The Action Plans are cross-pillar. 2004). Russia is ‘half in and half out’ the ENP. According to Smith (2005). 15 . 2. economic and security areas of co-operation. In the case of Libya.

16 . The Action Plans do not substitute the existing Association Agreements (AAs) or PCAs concluded with the neighbouring countries (See Appendix 2). Instead. As Haukkala (2005) points out. justice and home affairs. on this basis. the EU wants to tap the full potential of the already existing [agreements] /…/ and only then go beyond that with the prospect of realizing the so-called four freedoms /…/ within the Wider Europe’. the full implementation and exploitation of the provisions contained in the existing agreements remains a necessary precondition for any new development (European Commission. These can take the form of European Neighbourhood Agreements (ENAs) whose scope would be defined in the light of progress in meeting the priorities set out in the Action Plans (European Commission. energy. together with partner countries. social policy and people-to-people contacts (European Commission. covering a number of key areas for specific action: political dialogue and reform. Decisions may also be taken. Moreover. The progress in implementing the Action Plans is to be monitored by the bodies established through AAs or PCAs. transport. On the basis of this evaluation. trade and measures preparing partners for gradually obtaining a stake in the EU’s Internal Market. Likewise. they supplement and are designed on existing arrangements. environment and research and innovation. 2003a). 2004a). on the next step in the development of bilateral relations. information society.The ENP Action Plans refer to the EU relations with the neighbouring countries. will review the content of the Action Plans and decide on their adaptation and renewal. 2004a). including the possibility of new contractual relations. the Commission will report periodically on the progress accomplished. the EU. the approach is thus twofold: ‘first.

Although. Despite these attitudes. and Chisinau aspiration to become an associated member might become quite realistic’ (ADEPT. the negotiation process on the EU-Moldova Action Plan began with similar hopes. At that time it was expected that the document would be approved in May 2004. Moldova welcomed the EU intention to deepen its relations with neighbouring countries. 1. but on the other side it was more or less disappointed as the new Neighbourhood Policy of the EU is not considering a clear European perspective for Moldova. As an argument in this sense. this has been stated later. 2004/ no. the EU’s initiative towards its neighbourhood brought in Moldova new hopes with regard to its future European destiny. Moldovan negotiators were headed by Andrei Stratan. at that 17 . Moldovan authorities conceived this initiative as an additional way of co-operation with the EU and as ‘a bridge towards the following stage – association and integration into the EU’ (Gheorghiu. 2005a). 30. NEGOTIATION PROCESS ON THE EU-MOLDOVA ACTION PLAN The Republic of Moldova met the EU initiative towards its neighbourhood with mixed feelings. the head of Moldovan diplomacy Andrei Stratan expressed the view that ‘once Moldova fulfils the tasks outlined in the [Action Plan]. Although the ENP is not offering a membership perspective.III. the next two being scheduled up to the mid of March 2004. On one side. Rounds of negotiations First round The first round of negotiations began on 29 January 2004 in Chisinau. Another important reason for these reticent attitudes was the inclusion of Moldova in the same group with states without a European vocation. it would acquire a more advanced status in relations with EU. 33).

one convened by Prime Minister Vasile Tarlev and other by President Vladimir Voronin. At the 4. Southern Caucasus and Central Asia in External Relations DG. information society.time Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of Moldova4. the head of the Moldovan group of negotiators reported on the process of negotiations and mentioned that ‘in the nearest future Moldovan side is to prioritise the actions to be taken and come up with its own vision of the document’ (ADEPT. social issues. at this round of negotiations three roundtables were established: (1) International security issues. cited by ADEPT (2004/ no. 2004/ no. justice and home affairs. co-operation in humanitarian field. finance. At issue were the structure and elements of the Action Plan. agriculture and development. Second round Moldovan delegation headed by Prime Minister Tarlev participated on 23 February 2004. and (3) Transportation. According to a press release of the MFA. At issue was also the co-operation with the countries members of the SPSEE as well as participation in the EU launched cross-border co-operation initiative. (2) Economy. In this respect. telecommunications. trade. The results of the aforesaid talks were reviewed during two meetings. On 4 February 2004 Mr. held on 31 January 2004 within the framework of the NCEI. During the former one. at the second round of negotiations on the EU-Moldova Action Plan. energetics. Prime Minister Tarlev asked Ministries and Departments to formulate by 5 February 2004 their positions on the document. which are to be co-ordinated with EID at the national level. whereas the EU negotiators by Hugues Mingarelli. and afterwards with the European Commission. Andrei Stratan was nominated Minister of Foreign Affairs of Moldova. During the second meeting. 24). Director for Eastern Europe. 18 . 24). in Brussels. President Voronin called on mobilising the efforts of Moldovan officials so as to prepare for the second round of negotiations on the EU-Moldova Action Plan.

preferential visa regime as well as an asymmetric trade agreement. it was postponed for some time. in his opinion. Other propositions Moldovan side came up with included the country involvement in various European programs and communication networks. Later British Embassy issued a press release saying ‘negotiations were not stalled /…/ At this stage. cited by ADEPT (2004/ no. fact that raised speculations that the negotiation process was stalled.negotiation table Moldova side voiced its own vision over the document and insisted on including a separate chapter on Transnistria.e. 32). Although the third round of negotiations on the EU-Moldova Action Plan should has been held in mid-March. 2004/ no. i. The main goal is to obtain a clear and positive outcome in discussions on Action Plans. being just wrapped in another format. Moldovan Minister of Foreign Affairs Andrei Stratan stated ‘we managed to prove of being able to achieve all the objectives set for the Republic of Moldova’ (ADEPT. 19 . at the beginning of May 2004 Moldovan Minister of Foreign Affairs Andrei Stratan announced that the third round would resume on 4 June. objectives which. two months and a half later than initially planned. According to the Media Division of the MFA. 2004/ no. 26). EU member countries and new members review negotiation outcomes with all neighbourhood countries involved in Wider Europe program so as to determine future actions. are not that much different from those set for accession countries. Third round On 4 June the third round of talks on the EU-Moldova Action Plan was concluded in Chisinau. However. 27). Back from Brussels. extension of EIB mandate. The gist of this explanation has been confirmed by sources in the MFA who expected negotiations to resume end of March or early April 2004. and that on 15 June the document should be examined by the GAER Council. including for the Republic of Moldova’ (ADEPT. EU-Moldova Action Plan.

which outlines the framework of co-operation between the EU and Moldova for the next three years. fact which speaks about the limited transparency on behalf of the Moldovan authorities in this subject and/ or about the lack of a particular interest of the local media in the EU-Moldova Action Plan. 20 . education and environment. and Justice and home affairs. However.consultations were held in four working groups: Political dialogue and regional co-operation. The press release is rather vague when it comes to the date of signing the Plan: ‘once both parties complete the internal procedures’ (ADEPT. the European experts will forward to Chisinau the written agreements reached’. This was due to the relatively poor coverage by the media of the character and content of talks carried out. on June 15 the fourth round of bilateral consultations was held in Brussels. Fourth round Although only three negotiations rounds on the EU-Moldova Action Plan were initially scheduled. Minister of Foreign Affairs Stratan stated that the Plan was to be signed by both parties by the end of July. Infrastructure. Economic development. during which period the political aspects of the Plan will continue to be considered in Brussels. Until that period of time little information had been disclosed regarding the content of the document. so that it would be enforced commencing September 2004. 33). so that the document is officially approved at a later stage. MFA press release reads that during the round ‘parties reached an understanding on the content of this bilateral political document’. during a press conference upon his arrival in the country. According to the same source. 2004/ no. ‘on 15 June 2004.

while the latter had to wait for the EU feedback as regards to its standards and requirements. and Vasile Tarlev Prime Minister of Moldova signed the EU-Moldova Action Plan. Another problem which the negotiation process of the Action Plan has outlined was a reciprocal lack of knowledge of the EU about the policy developments in Moldova and of the latter about the EU policies. Morocco. On 22 February 2005. Commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner (2004) stated at the launching press conference that these documents will be submitted for the approval of Council and other relevant Association or Co-operation Councils. This could be an additional explanation of the delay in the negotiation process. Tunisia. Palestinian Authority. 21 . on behalf of the Council. Signing the EU-Moldova Action Plan European Commission launched on 9 December 2004 the EU-Moldova Action Plan. During the negotiations the EU had to rely much upon the information provided by the Moldovan Government. the Plan with Moldova was signed nearly a year later than promised. Thus. 2005). together with other six similar documents for Israel.2. although negotiations on the EU-Moldova Action Plan have been completed in June 2004. and Ukraine. During the meeting Jean Asselborn. programs and standards. launching in this way the implementation process of the document (MFAEI. the EU-Moldova Co-operation Council held its seventh meeting in Brussels. Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Immigration of Luxembourg. Jordan. given the EU intention to approve similar documents with a group of states in the same time. This contradicts obviously the differentiation principle announced by the EU to be used within the ENP.

The EU-Moldova PCA along with other similar documents signed with all CIS countries.1. signed in December 1989. it provides a comparative display of the content of these two documents and thirdly. For this purpose the chapter proceeds in three moves. replaced the Agreement between the EEC. EU-Moldova PCA The PCA was signed by the EU and Moldova in November 1994 and entered into force in July 1998. the PCA defines until now the legal framework of the relations between the EU and Moldova. All these three moves and the comparative method. 1. In the first instance it provides brief overviews of the EU-Moldova PCA and Action Plan. It aims to contribute to the debate on the extent to which the ENP is a substantial offer for Moldova or whether the ENP can be rather seen as a ‘Potemkin village’. The PCA is the first agreement signed between the EU and Moldova as an independent state. The objectives of the document can be read as follows: to provide an appropriate framework for the political dialogue between the Parties allowing the development of 22 . EURATOM and the USSR on trade and economic and commercial co-operation. Since 1998. it makes an analysis of the scope and substance of the new offers envisaged by the EU-Moldova Action Plan. Secondly. envisage mainly the political dimension of the co-operation process between the EU and Moldova.IV. due to the specific tasks of this paper. THE ENP – A ‘POTEMKIN VILLAGE’ FOR MOLDOVA? This chapter explores the central question of the present paper. EU-Moldova PCA & Action Plan – brief overviews 1. on the basis of this display. except Tajikistan (See Appendix 3).

and cultural co-operation. Co-operation Committee and the Parliamentary Cooperation Committee (See below Box 6 in Table 1). principles of international law. the provisions of certain parts of this Agreement. especially related with trade. to support efforts of Moldova to consolidate its democracy and to develop its economy and to complete the transition into a market economy (European Commission. industrial. financial.political relations. Due to the long timeframe necessary for the entry into force of the PCA. to promote trade and investment and harmonious economic relations between the Parties and so to foster their sustainable economic development. social. and financial co-operation (See Appendix 4). The document refers to a co-operation process between the Parties concerned in such areas as: political dialogue. The EU-Moldova PCA has 95 pages. had been put into effect by means of an Interim Agreement between the EU and Moldova.1). and human rights underpin the internal and external policies of the Parties and constitute an essential element of the PCA. commercial property protection and legislative co-operation. 106 articles and was concluded for a ten years period. 23 . cultural co-operation. The PCA institutionalizes the relations between the EU and Moldova by establishing three bodies: the Co-operation Council. business and investment. to provide a basis for legislative. competition. by underlining that the respect for democracy. 1998: Art. The EU-Moldova PCA transcends the strict economic objectives of the Agreement signed with the USSR in that it gave a political dimension to the bilateral co-operation. economic. trade in goods. intellectual. economic co-operation. which entered into force in May 1996. payments and capital.

24 . In the case of Moldova the TACIS Programme committed around € 123. etc. Kyrgyzstan. legal and administrative reform. However. Moreover. as the PCA did not set any priorities in terms of reforms to be implemented and benchmarks for the quality of implementation. Azerbaijan. Gheorghiu (2003c) observes that. Apart from this. (European Commission. Turkmenistan. but since 2003 it is covered by the ALA programme. Moldova. After eight years in implementing the PCA it can be said that this process has both positive and negative aspects. alleviation of the social consequences of transition. 2005a). the facilitation of Moldovan goods and services access to the European market. Georgia.1 million over the 1991-2005 period and it provided for measures focusing on: institutional. the EU had no real leverages over its partner. customs 5. Among the positive results it can be noted the alignment of Moldovan legislation to the EU norms in some policy areas. Caucasus and Central Asia (Armenia. Ukraine and Uzbekistan). strengthening Moldova’s judicial system and customs. the latter came down to the desire and ability of the Parties concerned. Russia. Kazakhstan.In order to help partner countries to implement efficiently the PCAs (See Appendix 3). in spite of the above progresses. Tajikistan. and aimed mainly at enhancing the transition process in these countries. due to its late entering into force. justice and home affairs. Mongolia was also covered by the TACIS programme from 1991. the TACIS programme provided grant-financed technical assistance to 12 countries of Eastern Europe. the EU provided assistance trough the TACIS financial instrument5. While Moldova had little insensitive to implement the PCA. the EU-Moldova PCA did not provide the expected results. Belarus. the co-operation area envisaged by the PCA was reduced to the co-operation in trade and economic relations. neither enough interest and will for a more active involvement in the implementation process of the PCA. private sector and economic development. Launched by the EC in 1991. etc.

economic and cultural relations with the EU. EU-Moldova Action Plan The EU-Moldova Action Plan was signed in February 2005. enhanced cross border cooperation and shared responsibility in conflict prevention and conflict resolution (Ibidem). The Action Plans with Moldova and Ukraine are the only such documents. concluded so far within the ENP. The document covers a timeframe of three years and invites Moldova to enter into intensified political. although the PCA was conceived by policy makers as a first step in a gradual integration of Moldova into the EU (Chirilă. 2004d). 2001). but a political one. From this stand point the Action Plan is not a legal document. joint ownership and differentiation and seeks to contribute to the further development of the EU-Moldova bilateral relations (European Commission. The document’s approach is founded on partnership. but supplement the existing PCA. 2004c. Thus. On 6. 1. Finally. which acknowledge the European aspirations of these countries (European Commission. the final objective of the PCA is totally different from that of the Association Agreements (AAs) concluded with the CEEC. security.and cross-border co-operation. but specifies also that for the near future the PCA remains a valid basis for EU-Moldovan co-operation. the EUMoldova Action Plan does not substitute. 2004c). a membership perspective for Moldova. Seven priorities out of ten refer to the political dimension of the co-operation process between the EU and Moldova. Thus. The Action Plan acknowledges Moldova’s European aspirations6. The Action Plan sets out a comprehensive set of priorities in areas within the scope of the PCA (See below Box 2 in Table 1). even in the distant future. legal harmonisation and implementation of the study on feasibility of FTA creation. 25 . the progress in meeting these priorities is to be monitored in the bodies established by the PCA and by the European Commission which will issue a mid-term report on progress accomplished.2. According to the Action Plan. as the PCA does. the Agreement does not envisage.

will review the content of the Action Plan and decide on its adaptation and renewal. The EU-Moldova Action Plan contains 46 pages. despite the rhetoric employed. the EU-Moldova Action Plan is not a bilateral document. market and regulatory reform. the Plan. 7. because there are only few obligations taken by the EU (Gheorghiu. In her opinion. environment. 2005b). Stetter. Most of these objectives and actions fall only on the Moldovan side responsibility. trade-related issues. co-operation for the settlement of the Transnistrian conflict. 14 refer explicitly to the EU and 40 refer to both the EU and Moldova (See Appendix 5). some observers consider that. Tunisia and Ukraine insist that the neighbours must conclude readmission agreements with the EU. this inconsistency in the EU’s treatment of its neighbours may reduce the ENP’s credibility and legitimacy. Morocco. and more a list of things for the EU and Israel to do together. and research. which means that they must agree to readmit not only their own nationals expelled from member states. which is less a list of things for Israel to do. 2005)7. telecommunications. development and innovation. In this context. 26 . co-operation in Justice and Home Affairs.the basis of this evaluation. energy. Therefore. Smith (2005) remarks that the exception is the Action Plan concluded with Israel. 2004a. 2004c). being more or less commanding (Smith. consideration will be given to the possibility of a new contractual relationship through a European Neighbourhood Agreement (European Commission. transport. economic and social reform and development. formulating 80 objectives and 294 actions which must be taken across seven main fields: political dialogue and reform. 2005. the EU. Smith (2005) observes that the Action Plans with Moldova. Thus. The Commission will issue a second report after three years and in light of the fulfilment of the objectives of the Action Plan and of the overall evolution of EU-Moldova relations. together with Moldova. but the nationals of other countries who have passed through their territory on the way to the EU. as most of the similar documents concluded within the ENP do. reflects an important dose of EU self-interest and strong ‘centre-periphery’ characteristics. and people-to-people contacts (See Appendix 4).

objectives no. Likewise. As such. in the case of some objectives and actions spelled out by the EUMoldova Action Plan it is difficult to see which Part has to be responsible for their implementation (See. being thus very difficult to demonstrate that some actions are implemented or not (Smith. 68. for example. due to the lack of precise benchmarks in evaluating the implementation of the document. the Table 1 serves as a prerequisite for a comparative analysis developed in the last part of this chapter with regard to the political aspects of the documents concerned. Sometimes. 72-73). 2004b) were published when the Plan for Moldova was in its final stage of elaboration (For details see Gheorghiu. even when this is clear. 2005. 2. 27 . Gheorghiu. Or the quality of implementation would lead to interpretations. it will help to find out the areas where the Action Plan maintains the same state of affairs foreseen by the PCA. although it is clear that the EU-Moldova Action Plan must be implemented in a three years timeframe. One of the reasons in this sense is that the ENP Strategy Paper and Country Report on Moldova (European Commission. 2005b. it is not always clear how progress will be judged.Apart from this. 2005b). 2005c). The Table 1 below uses brief extracts from the political sections of these two documents so as to facilitate a better understanding of the substance of the new co-operation opportunities brought by the EU-Moldova Action Plan. Likewise. All of these lead to the idea that the EU-Moldova Action Plan is far to be a very well prepared document. EU-Moldova PCA & Action Plan – comparative display The present section provides a comparative display of the EU-Moldova PCA and Action Plan. there are no exact requirements regarding the time and quantity in meeting particular objectives and actions.

1).To provide a basis for legislative /…/ co-operation. One of the key objectives of this action plan will be to further support a viable solution to the Transnistrian conflict. . enhanced cross border co-operation and shared responsibility in conflict prevention and conflict resolution. 3). The Parties consider that it is essential for the future prosperity and stability of the region of the former Soviet Union that the newly independent states should maintain and develop co-operation among themselves in compliance with the principles of the Helsinki Final Act and with international law and in the spirit of good neighbourly relations. . . . and thus with the community of democratic nations (Art. Moldova is invited to enter into intensified political. Democracy and .Sustained efforts towards a viable solution to the Transnistrian conflict. principles of international law. [which] remains [for the near future] a valid basis for EU-Moldovan co-operation. .Table 1 The spheres General issues (Box 1) EU-Moldova PCA (extract) EU-Moldova Action Plan (extract) Respect for democracy. and human rights. . including trafficking in human beings. 6). Objectives and priorities (Box 2) . Political dialogue and reform (Box 3) . . Its implementation will help fulfil the provisions in the PCA. . The ENP of the EU sets ambitious objectives based on commitments to shared values and effective implementation of political. security. and will make every effort to encourage this process (Art. economic and cultural relations with the EU. economic and institutional reforms. underpin the internal and external policies of the Parties and constitute an essential element of partnership and of this Agreement (Art.To provide an appropriate framework for the political dialogue between the Parties allowing the development of political relations.Stepping up the fight against organised crime.Strengthen the stability and effectiveness of institutions guaranteeing . .Strengthen the links of the Republic of Moldova with the [European] Community.Further strengthening the stability and effectiveness of institutions guaranteeing democracy and the rule of law.Observance of the principles of democracy (Art.Progress towards a system of efficient. ensuring the democratic conduct of parliamentary elections (February 2005) in Moldova in accordance with European standards. including initiating the process towards conclusion of a readmission agreement between the European Community and Moldova.Further reinforcing administrative and judicial capacity.Ensuring respect for the freedom of the media and the freedom of expression.To support efforts of the Republic of Moldova to consolidate its democracy (Art. . 2). 6).Ensuring the efficient management of migratory flows. The EU-Moldova Action Plan is a political document laying out the strategic objectives of the co-operation between Moldova and the EU. as well as the principles of market economy. comprehensive state border management on all sectors of the Moldovan border including the Transnistrian sector.

.Eradication of ill-treatment and torture.Ensure respect for the freedom of expression. respecting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic of Moldova within its internationally recognized borders.Sustained efforts towards a settlement of the Transnistrian conflict. .Ensure the effectiveness of the fight against corruption. including the impartiality and effectiveness of the prosecution. so as to ensure the independence and impartiality of the judiciary.Further develop co-operation in the area of combating terrorism. and guaranteeing respect for democracy. .Respect and promotion of human rights. and the fight against. . . particularly those of minorities (Art. the rule of law and human rights. . 6). thus increasing security and stability. the trafficking in human beings. . the rule of law Human rights and fundamental freedoms .Increasing convergence of positions on international issues of mutual concern. complementary to the implementation of the present EU-Moldova Action Plan. Co-operation on foreign and security policy.Ensure equal treatment.Ensure respect of children’s rights.Co-operat[ion] on matters pertaining to the strengthening of stability and security in Europe (Art. and to strengthen the capacity of the judiciary. . 3 above.Ensure respect of human rights and fundamental freedoms. . . . and for addressing the problems faced by victims of trafficking.Develop and implement an appropriate legal framework for the prevention of. .Strengthen political dialogue and co-operation on foreign and security policy issues.Ensure respect for Trade Unions’ rights and core labour standards.democracy and the rule of law.Ensure international Justice through the International Criminal Court. nonproliferation of weapons of mass destruction and illegal arms exports. in line with international and European standards. . Regional cooperation See Art. conflict prevention and crisis management . 6). . . Co-operation for the settlement of the Transnistrian conflict (Box 4) Co-operation in Justice and Home Affairs (Box 5) 29 .Ensure respect for the freedom of association and foster the development of civil society.Continue Moldova’s targeted co-operation under activities of the Stability Pact for South-East Europe.Review existing legislation. . including the rights of persons belonging to national minorities.

Approximation of the system of state authorities responsible for implementation and realisation of legislation on asylum and refugees to EU norms and standards. also by rendering consultative.Adoption and efficient implementation of legislation and measures for the development of arrangements under which judicial co-operation can be offered and obtained from other states. Border management . .Reinforce the fight against trafficking in human beings. Fight against organised crime . including the right to seek asylum and respect for the principle of nonrefoulement. implementation of the 1951 UN Convention relating to the status of refugees and the 1967 Protocol relating to the status of refugees.Development of a system of efficient. Police and judicial co-operation . .Supporting the efficient management of migration flows. financial and expert assistance to the government of Moldova and promotion of its activities. . including the Transnistrian sector.Ratification and full implementation of international instruments which are of particular importance in combating organised crime. as well as activities to prevent trafficking in human beings and to reintegrate victims of this traffic.Improve co-operation regarding the efficient management of migration flows and on readmission of own nationals. comprehensive state border management on all sectors of the Moldovan border.Approximation of Moldovan legislation to the EU norms and standards. .Assess the scale of illegal migration to. and smuggling of illegal migrants. The same bodies established under the PCA supervise the Institutions The Co-operation Council shall supervise the implementation of this 30 . the EU Member States and neighbouring countries.Further develop co-operation between Moldova and EU Member State judicial and law enforcement authorities. especially of women and children.Migration issues . . . .Intensify and facilitate cross-border co-operation between Moldova. in particular to increase professional level of relevant staff through study of foreign experience and internship in relevant services of EU countries dealing with migration policy. persons without nationality and third country nationals. via and from Moldova and monitor migratory movements.Pursue a dialogue concerning co-operation on visa policy.

The Parties undertake to examine together amendments which it may be appropriate to make to any part of the Agreement three years after the entry into force of the Agreement or when Moldova becomes a member of GATT (Art. The level of ambition of the relationship will depend on the degree of Moldova’s commitment to common values as well as its capacity to implement jointly agreed priorities. It shall meet at ministerial level once a year. The Co-operation Committee assists the Co-operation Council in the performance of its duties and it is composed of representatives of the members of the Council of the EU and of members of the [European] Commission. A first review of the implementation of the Action Plan will be undertaken within two years of its adoption. on the other.5). and of representatives of the Government of Moldova. It shall examine any major issues arising within the framework of the Agreement. 82-83). Moldova and the EU will co-operate closely in implementing this Action Plan. The Commission will produce reports on the Action Plan’s implementation at regular intervals. normally at senior civil servant level. and of members of the Government of Moldova.(Box 6) Agreement. 87-89). The Parties shall take any general or specific measures required to fulfil their obligations under the Agreement (Art. on the other (Art. on the one hand. 98). 99). 84). The duties of the Co-operation Committee include the preparation of meetings of the Co-operation Council (Art. The Agreement shall be automatically renewed year by year (Art. The Parliamentary Co-operation Committee may request relevant information [and make recommendations] regarding the implementation of this Agreement from [/to] the Co-operation Council (Art. The Action Plan can be regularly amended and/or updated to reflect progress in addressing the priorities. The Co-operation Council shall consist of the members of the Council of the EU and members of the [European] Commission. 31 . implementation of the Action Plan. on the one hand. General provisions and monitoring (Box 7) The Parliamentary Co-operation Committee is a forum for members of the Moldovan Parliament and the EP to meet and exchange views.

it could be noted that these documents share a similar rationale and do not differ radically in their concrete approaches and instruments. in migration issues. Particularly important for Moldova was the inclusion of a distinctive section in the EU-Moldova Action Plan dedicated to the settlement of the Transnistrian conflict. specific and operational co-operation process between the Parties. The added value of the EU-Moldova Action Plan Comparing the above provisions of the EU-Moldova PCA and Action Plan on their political dimensions. The extension of the EU’s borders. regional and global needs and threats. The Action Plan envisages a more complex and. However. some visible differences should be mentioned. .3. overall the EU engagement through the Action Plan seems more visible and participative. and fighting against. border management. The establishment of the new areas of co-operation and updating the former scope of the dialogue between the Parties come to respond to the present domestic. Likewise. non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and illegal arms export. eradication of ill-treatment and torture. its increasing interests in the stability and security of its neighbourhood and the evolution of the EU’s own policy competences must be seen as the main reasons for such an engagement. in the same time. Through the Action Plan the EU has committed itself to support the settlement of the Transnistrian conflict and to consider ways to strengthen its engagement. combating terrorism. although there are few measures which make the EU responsible for their implementation. the EU-Moldova Action Plan updates the EU-Moldova dialogue in such areas as prevention of. fighting against organised crime and in police and judicial matters. the trafficking in human beings. Paradoxically. The document considers new areas of dialogue such as co-operation for the settlement of the Transnistrian conflict.

In this context. 2006). etc. fight against organized crime. border management. independence of the judiciary. Likewise. aspects which could be easily circumscribed to the Copenhagen political criterion. Moreover. the progress on the political dimension represents the precondition for co-operation and further developments on other dimensions of the 33 . although the philosophy of the Plan is not about accession to the EU. although there is no single explicit reference to them. The structure of the ‘Political dialogue and reform’ section of the Action Plan is almost identical with the structure of the ‘Building the rule of law and strengthening democracy’ chapter of the European Strategy of the Republic of Moldova. Chirilă (2001) concludes that the PCA are inspired from the AAs. freedom of expression. The same could be said about the structure of the ‘Co-operation in Justice and Home Affairs’ section of the Plan and the ‘Justice and Home Affairs’ chapter of the European Strategy. Chirilă (2001) also remarks that the objectives of the PCA meet the Copenhagen criteria.In a comparative analysis of the EU-Moldova PCA and AAs. The latter has been developed in a strict accordance with the AAs. the focus of the Action Plan on these criteria is as well as more obvious. de-codifying the provisions of the EU-Moldova Action Plan it could be noted that it gives a particular importance to the political aspects of bilateral co-operation. fight against corruption. which had begun to be designed before the negotiation process on the EU-Moldova Action Plan has started and which strikingly resemble the European integration strategies of the CEEC. including the rights of persons belonging to national minorities. From this stand point. respect of human rights. civil society sector. Both documents refer to the stability of democratic institutions. In the case of the EU-Moldova Action Plan the similarity with the AAs is even more obvious. both referring to migration issues. and respect for trade unions’ rights. the Action Plan displays many similarities with the European Strategy of the Republic of Moldova (IPP.

Under institutional aspect the EU-Moldova Action Plan does not bring anything new. this never has been done. Likewise. Different from the PCA. Co-operation Committee and Parliamentary Co-operation Committee – supervise the implementation of the Action Plan. As it comes to the obligation of Parties to implement these documents. while the formulation used by the Action Plan is more evasive and addressed mainly to Moldova (Box 7).bilateral dialogue. Apart from general issues. than the PCA does. Another difference is that the implementation of the Action Plan will be evaluated through regular monitoring reports by the European Commission. while in the case of the PCA the Commission had no such obligation. a future updating of the Action Plan should avoid as much as possible the ‘moving target’ problem (ERI. it seems that the Action Plan gives a greater importance to the political transformations in Moldova. the Action Plan approaches the respect of human rights in a more detailed manner. it regards the children’s rights and equal gender opportunities (See Box 3 in Table 1). In this respect. A substantial 34 . 2002). However. the formulation used by the PCA seems more binding and addressed equally to both Parties. One consequence of the lack of such obligation was that. the same bodies established under the PCA – Co-operation Council. it should be remarked that seven out of ten implementation priorities set out at the beginning of the EU-Moldova Action Plan refer to the political aspects of bilateral co-operation (See Box 2 in Table 1). although the PCA stipulates that it can be revised (Art.5 in Box 7). as the European Strategy of the Republic of Moldova does as well. In the case of the Action Plan it is to be expected that the first Commission’s monitoring report will lead to the updating of the document. as this could make unrealistic the achievement of the new policy targets during the last year of its implementation. As Box 6 in Table 1 shows.

With regard to regional co-operation. the ENP brings Moldova in a different geopolitical and geo-strategic perspective. Apart from these. Likewise. but does Moldova deserve more? Then. to be treated similarly as other European neighbouring countries without a clear European vocation is not what Moldovan diplomacy expected. the EU-Moldova Action Plan itself mentions explicitly new partnership perspectives opened up by the ENP. an increased financial support through the ENPI for the implementation of the Action 35 . If the EU approach through PCAs designed a partnership with the CIS. one of the few responsibilities assumed by the EU through the Action Plan is to support the participation of Moldova in the SEECP. the ‘enlargement fatigue’ of the EU and its actual difficult situation. an upgrade in the intensity of political cooperation. it should be noted that the EU-Moldova Action Plan is based on different spatial rationalities. without repeating the opportunities already discussed. it could be noted: the perspective of moving beyond the PCA to a significant degree of integration and the possibility for Moldova to participate progressively in key aspects of EU policies and programmes. which is an explicit European arrangement and complementary to the implementation of this Plan. while the EU approach through PCAs stresses for the CIS countries the importance of ‘co-operation among themselves /…/ in the spirit of good neighbourly relations’. Of course. based on the European neighbourhood and proximity concepts. after the French and Dutch ‘No’ to the Constitution for Europe. the EU-Moldova Action Plan specifies the necessity for Moldova to cooperate within the SPSEE. Among the most important. which is seen by Moldovan diplomacy as a real possibility to join the Western Balkans countries on their way to the EU.changing of the Plan’s conditionality would make difficult to comply with it and would tend to generate disappointment and frustration of the Parties concerned. do not allow the European institutions to promise more. Moreover.

2003.Plan and for cross-border and trans-national co-operation between Moldova and the EU. therefore. The subtle message which the ENP and Action Plan are bringing along for Moldovan authorities should be understand as follows: the EU acknowledges Moldova’s European aspirations (acknowledgment not present in the case of the PCA). the EU is offering a deeper political integration. 2004). after honouring of the present enlargement agenda (Bulgaria. establishing a constructive dialogue on possibilities of visa facilitation. Ferrero-Waldner. which means more frequent and higher level political dialogue. on the political side of the ENP. Benita Ferrero-Waldner. Croatia 36 . Brussels is now ‘tired and busy’. V) seem encouraging. and in addressing the security threats for common concern. 2005a). enhanced assistance for further strengthening the institutions protecting democracy and the rule of law. Of course. support including technical assistance and twinning to meet EU norms and standards. 2004c. is convinced that the ENP represent ‘a substantial offer’ for the countries covered by this policy. 2004. However some of the results achieved already in the implementation process of the Action Plan (see Ch. Commissioner for External Relations and European Neighbourhood Policy. and opening a Commission Delegation in Moldova (European Commission. In her opinion. Most of these new opportunities of co-operation between the Parties have been stressed as well as by important European decision-makers (Verheugen. like making multilateral institutions more effective. MFAEI. a simple listing or mentioning of the new co-operation opportunities brought by the EU-Moldova Action Plan does not mean that all of them will be sufficiently explored. and closer co-operation in promoting common foreign policy priorities. Romania. and targeted advice and support for legislative approximation through a mechanism such as TAIEX.

the ENP and Action Plan have also determined Moldova to be more receptive. implement rigorously the Action Plan. in that it does not lead to the opening of a clear European perspective for Moldova. contributed to a more operational. extended their co-operation opportunities. With all its objective and inherent deficiencies. Therefore. Lynch. some could argue that the EUMoldova Action Plan is a ‘Potemkin village’. however it will let few ‘doors’ or rather ‘windows’ open. 2006a. 2006b). visible and participative EU’s engagement in Moldova. and then the opportunity of a new contractual relationship will be considered.and Turkey8) the EU will stay away from new accessions. process which stands crucial for the European destiny of Moldova. at least for the time being. as its finality does not bring any significant changes. this points to the relevance of the path dependency in EU foreign relations and to the EU constraints in terms of what it can offer the neighbours (Stetter. 2004). 37 . responsive and responsible with regard to European values and standards in a broad spectrum of areas. it is beyond doubts that the ENP and Action Plan brought a new dynamics in relations between the EU and Moldova. In the case of Turkey there are voices that question the opportunity of its integration into the EU (For details see Beunderman. From this stand point. added more elements of conditionality especially with regard to political dialogue and reform. emphasising thus the necessity of democratic transformations as a prerequisite for further developments in other co-operation areas. Nevertheless. updated the areas of dialogue. specified and detailed the co-operation process between the Parties. 2005. 8. Apart from this. and brought Moldova in a different spatial perspective based on the European neighbourhood and proximity concepts. According to some authors. Gheorghiu (2005c) goes even further and states that ‘the [EU-Moldova] Action Plan ‘is a modified and a bit more specific PCA’. the finality of the EU-Moldova PCA and Action Plan is quite similar. this new attitude of the Moldovan authorities is proven by the way they are engaged in the implementation of the EU-Moldova Action Plan.

as it would repeat the extensive work which has been done already by governmental and civil society institutions. IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING OF THE EU-MOLDOVA ACTION PLAN The final part of the present paper does not attempt to evaluate rigorously the implementation process of the EU-Moldova Action Plan.Adoption of the Laws on modification and completion of the Election Code. . It attempts to present the main achievements on the political side of the implementation process of the Action Plan and to highlight some issues related to the monitoring activities performed by Moldovan Government. 38 . . joining the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. which aim to adjust the electoral legislation to the recommendations of the Venice Commission and OSCE. 1. . introducing a new article in the Criminal Code that establishes punishments for applying the torture.Adoption of the Law on the modification of some legislative acts on justice. civil society sector and European institutions. which introduces new regulations on organization of the justice and status of judge.Abolition of death penalty under all circumstances. A special attention here will be given to the governmental monitoring reports. adoption of the Law on the insurance of equal chances to women and men. Its aim is rather more limited.Opening of the European Commission Delegation in Chisinau. Main achievements Among the main achievements in implementing the EU-Moldova Action Plan it could be noted: . and aims to strengthen the independence of judges and autonomy of the judiciary.V.

- Appointment of an EU special representative to Moldova;
- Participation of the EU as an observer in the negotiation process of the Transnistrian conflict;
- Creation of the EU Border Assistance Mission to Moldova and Ukraine;
- Establishment of a new customs regime at the Moldovan-Ukrainian border;
- Adoption of the Law on the prevention and combat of trafficking in human beings; ratification
of the CoE Convention on struggle against trafficking in human beings; amendment of the
Penal Code by toughening the punishment for trafficking (For details see Gov. of the RM,
2005a, 2005b, 2006b, 2006c; EXPERT-GRUP and ADEPT, 2006a, 2006b, 2006c).
Although there is still room for improvements in most cases of these achievements, it is
beyond doubts that the EU-Moldova Action Plan served as a strong impetus for reforms. From
this stand point, despite the existing criticisms, the ENP acts to some extent in the case of
Moldova as an EU ‘form of external governance’. However, if Moldova wants a clear
membership perspective it should become the leading country among those involved within the
ENP as regards to the speed and the quality of the Action Plan implementation process. However,
this is far to be enough. Moldova should go beyond the declared objectives of the Action Plan. It
has to start on its own the gradual adoption of the acquis communautaire. For this purpose, the
experience, expertise and assistance of the CEEC, especially of Romania – with which Moldova
enjoys close relationships and significant affinities – should be used. Additionally, as Boţan
(2006) suggests, the participation within the SEECP and CEFTA would have the potential to link
Moldova with the Western Balkans countries on their way to the EU.

2. Government of the Republic of Moldova
For an efficient implementation of the EU-Moldova Action Plan, the Moldovan
Government elaborated the National Program for the Implementation of the EU-Moldova Action

39

Plan (Gov. of the RM, 2006a), which establishes necessary measures to be taken, responsible
institutions and terms for their realization.
With the same purpose, in August 2005 four inter-ministerial commissions were
established:
a) Commission for law and security issues (Ministry of Justice – co-ordinating institution);
b) Commission for social-economic issues (Ministry of Economy and Trade – co-ordinating
institution);
c) Commission for infrastructure issues (Ministry of Transport and Road Management – coordinating institution);
d) Commission for cultural and humanitarian issues (Ministry of Education, Youth and Sport –
co-ordinating institution) (MFAEI, 2004).
According to the MFAEI (2004), the monitoring reports on the implementation of the
EU-Moldova Action Plan are realized monthly, quarterly and each half year by the Co-ordinating
Ministries, while the MFAEI provides general monitoring at the governmental level.
Nevertheless, by the time of writing this paper, Moldovan authorities have issued only four such
monitoring reports: two in English and other two in Romanian. The reports in English refer to the
February/March – August/September9 (Gov. of the RM, 2005a) and August – October 2005
(Gov. of the RM, 2005b) periods. The reports in Romanian refer to the February – December
2005 (Gov. of the RM, 2006b) and January – March 2006 (Gov. of the RM, 2006c) periods.
The reports represent an extensive and very detailed work done by Moldovan
authorities. However some drawbacks of this work should be noted.
They are useful resources in observing the implementation process dynamics of the
Action Plan, but mainly for specialized institutions and persons with a background in public

9. The monitoring period is not explicitly indicated.

40

policy field. As they are very extensive and represent documents for a wide-public use, the
presence of the introductory and concluding/ summarizing sections in the case of these reports
would facilitate their comprehension by the wide public. With one exception (Gov. of the RM,
2005a10), they have no introductory, neither concluding/ summarizing sections.
Another shortcoming of these reports is that they have an obvious self-praising
character with regard to the actions undertaken by Moldovan authorities. In all these 4 reports, in
their sections dedicated to the political aspects of the implementation process of the Action Plan,
there are only 10 critical remarks. All 10 are mentioned in 2 of these reports. Only 3 critical notes
refer to problems which are put on the responsibility of Moldovan authorities (Gov. of the RM,
2005a, 2006b), while 7 envisage problems on the responsibility of Transnistrian and Russian
authorities (Gov. of the RM, 2006b). Among the criticisms which regard Moldovan authorities, 1
refers to the problems in judicial system (Gov. of the RM, 2005a, p. 9) and 2 refer to the
deficiencies in the field of fight against corruption (Gov. of the RM, 2006b, p. 9).
One example which points to a degree of subjectivity of governmental monitoring
process is the way in which one of the reports relates about the character of the 6th March 2005
parliamentary elections. The report mentions that ‘international observers from OSCE/ODIHR,
CoE and EU appreciated the parliamentary elections from the 6th March as correct and
democratic, in accordance with international standards, which is an important indicator of the
evolution and stability of democracy and its institutions in the Republic of Moldova’ (Gov. of the
RM, 2005a, p. 5). In the same time, the conclusions of the OSCE/ODIHR election observation
mission show that: ‘While the 6 March 2005 parliamentary elections in the Republic of Moldova
generally complied with most OSCE commitments, Council of Europe and other international
standards for democratic elections, nevertheless, they fell short of some that are central to a

10. This report has introduction, but no conclusions.

41

some of the reports refer to actions performed in other periods than the timeframes they are covering (Gov. Apart from this. the information these reports are providing is sometimes repeated (Gov. 14).5 EURO) towards 11 persons11 who won trials against Moldovan Government at the ECHR (Gov. p. 14). while in the first half of the 2006 the CHRM has already documented 968 such petitions. of the RM. Moreover. 2005a: 32. 2005b: 2. 2006b: 7). no one of the reports points to the existing problems in the field of human rights protection. In this regard. 2006b. 2006). of the RM. of the RM. In particular. one of the reports presents as an achievement (!). 11. As has been shown above. The major objective of the CHRM is to insure the activity of Parliament attorneys (ombudsmen) for the purpose of guaranteeing the observance of human rights and constitutional freedoms in Moldova. of the RM. in its ‘Human rights and fundamental freedoms’ section. Likewise. The ECHR decisions in their cases reinforced these suspicions. there were suspicions of a politically motivated decision. imprecise (Gov. 4-5). 12. of the RM. which exceeds the number of petitions for the similar period of the 2005 (Flux. compared with a number of 1102 petitions for 2004. In fact. campaign conditions and access to the media were not satisfactorily equitable. the elections confirmed negative trends already noted in the 2003 local elections’ (OSCE/ODIHR. this means that Moldovan Government had to honour these obligations as a result of the human rights infringements and abuses. few months before the 2005 parliamentary elections. honouring by Moldova of its financial obligations (41652. 2005a: 37. 42 . 2005).genuinely competitive election process. One of such reports issued by the CHRM12 mentions that this institution has registered 1422 petitions in 2005 on human rights infringements. In the case of arresting the public servants Constantin Becciev and Vladimir Şarban. 2005a: 8. the specialized reports relate that the human right protection in Moldova was not been improved in 2005. 2005a: 7) and irrelevant (Gov. In the same time. as they were closed to one of the opposition parties – Alliance ‘Our Moldova’.

Moldova made a moderate progress in implementing the Action Plan and the main problems of this process remain in the field of judiciary system and human rights protection. In comparison with the governmental reports. one year after 43 . Civil society Civil society is presented in the monitoring process of the EU-Moldova Action Plan implementation by two important projects. 2006c). European institutions According to the Action Plan. on the implementation of this document. although many policy fields were reformed. According to them. 2006b. the European Commission will undertake the first review of the implementation of this document within two years of its adoption. The first one is implemented by ADEPT Association and EXPERT-GRUP. By the time of writing this paper. called ‘Euromonitor’. 2006a. Apart from acknowledging the progress realised. 2006a. The aim of this project is to monitor the implementation of the Action Plan in particular policy sectors and to formulate recommendations which would help the public authorities to enhance this process. 2006b. the mentioned consortium has issued three such reports. Moldova falls short of applying rigorously the new approved legal norms (For details see EXPERT-GRUP and ADEPT. The first unified report within ‘Euroforum’ is intended to be launched in autumn 2006. ‘Euromonitors’ seem to be more accessible to the wide public and as well as more objective. 4. 2006c). The second project is developed within ‘Euroforum’ and was set up under the auspices of the European Initiatives Program of the Soros Foundation-Moldova. which cover ten priority fields identified by the Action Plan (EXPERT-GRUP and ADEPT. Likewise. However. which are publishing quarterly reports. they also pay attention to the negative aspects in the implementation process of the EU-Moldova Action Plan.3.

in Brussels. on the 22nd of June 2006. 68). to strengthen the judicial system and stressed the importance of carrying out these and other reforms without delay (ADEPT. Secretary-General of the Council of the EU. A similar opinion has been expressed in March 2006 by the EP in its resolution on human rights in Moldova and. to increase the efforts against any manifestation of trafficking in human beings. but noted that still much work is to be done for insurance of human rights. in particular. 2006/ no. stressed the same necessities in the implementation process of the Action Plan (Council of the EU. Moldpres. 44 . 2006/ no. 70).its signing the Delegation of the European Commission to Moldova have expressed satisfaction with accomplishments registered in implementing the Action Plan. in Transnistria. in the field of law application and the freedom of expression (Delegation of the European Commission to Moldova. 2006. President of the Republic of Moldova. 2006. reformation of judiciary. ADEPT. Reporter. Javier Solana. combat of corruption. at his meeting with Vladimir Voronin. 2006).md. 2006. The EP called on the Moldovan Government to continue the process of reforms for progress of the state based on the rule of law and combat of corruption in state institutions.

Firstly. However. During the negotiations the EU had to rely much upon the information provided by the Moldovan Government. 14 refer explicitly to the EU and 40 refer to both the EU and Moldova. particularly to its association with the EU. Moreover. the ENP brought in Moldova new hopes that a successful implementation of the EU-Moldova Action Plan could lead to a new stage in its relations with the EU. the EU disregarded one of the fundamental principles of the ENP – differentiation.VI. Moldova welcomed the EU intention to deepen its relations with neighbouring countries. the negotiation process on the Action Plan outlined a reciprocal lack of knowledge of the EU about the policy developments in Moldova and of the latter about the EU policies. the Plan with Moldova was signed nearly a year later than promised. CONCLUSIONS Moldova met the EU neighbourhood initiative with mixed feelings. The delay in the negotiation process and approval of the EU-Moldova Action Plan outlined two important problems. despite the existing reserves. but on the other side it was more or less disappointed as the ENP is not providing for Moldova a clear European membership perspective. Secondly. On one side. while the latter had to wait for the EU feedback as regards to its standards and requirements. This asymmetry reflects an important dose of EU self-interest and strong ‘centreperiphery’ characteristics. in the case of some objectives and actions spelled out by the EU-Moldova Action Plan it is difficult to see which Part has to be responsible for their 45 . The EU-Moldova Action Plan formulates 80 objectives and 294 actions to be considered by the Parties concerned. Though negotiations on the EU-Moldova Action Plan have been completed in June 2004. Most of these objectives and actions fall only on the Moldovan side responsibility. programs and standards. given the EU intention to approve similar documents with a group of neighbouring states in the same time.

Moreover. Of course. emphasising thus the necessity of democratic transformations as a prerequisite for further developments in other co-operation areas. extended their co-operation opportunities. it could be noted that these documents share a similar rationale and do not differ radically in their concrete approaches and instruments. contributed to a more operational. Comparing the provisions of the EU-Moldova PCA and Action Plan on their political dimensions. the settlement of this conflict. a simple listing of the new cooperation opportunities brought by the Action Plan does not mean that all of them will be sufficiently explored. through the ENP means. However. specified and detailed the co-operation process between the Parties. added more elements of conditionality especially with regard to political dialogue and reform. in that it does not lead to the opening of a clear European perspective for Moldova. Not less important is that the ENP and EU-Moldova 46 . visible and participative EU’s engagement in Moldova. and brought Moldova in a different spatial perspective based on the European neighbourhood and proximity concepts. some could argue that the EU-Moldova Action Plan is a ‘Potemkin village’ for Moldova. some of the results achieved already in the implementation process of the Plan seem encouraging. Particularly important for Moldova is the presence of a distinctive section in the EUMoldova Action Plan dedicated to the settlement of the Transnistrian conflict and the EU’s commitment to support. The ENP and Action Plan brought a new dynamics in relations between the EU and Moldova. This lack of explicit provisions raises difficulties for an objective assessment of the progress made in implementing the Action Plan. the EU-Moldova Action Plan itself mentions explicitly new partnership perspectives opened up by the ENP. However. some visible differences should be noted. Therefore. Apart from these. updated the areas of dialogue. the finality of both documents is quite similar.implementation.

Finally. it should be noted that an objective monitoring activity and a judicious further adaptation of the EU-Moldova Action Plan would substantially help Moldova to implement rigorously this document. responsive and responsible with regard to European values and standards in a broad spectrum of areas. the ENP acts to some extent in the case of Moldova as an EU ‘form of external governance’. In this context. the implementation of the EU-Moldova Action Plan stands crucial for the European destiny of Moldova. in fighting against corruption. The subtle message which the ENP and Action Plan are bringing along for Moldovan authorities could be read briefly as follows: implement rigorously the Action Plan and then the opportunity of a new contractual relationship will be considered. there is still room for improvements in most of the reformed areas. Therefore. if Moldova wants a clear membership perspective it should become the leading country among those involved within the ENP as regards to the speed and the quality of the Action Plan implementation process. despite the existing criticisms. Moreover. Therefore. much work has to be done to strengthen the independence of judiciary. to ensure the freedom of expression and for human rights protection. However. the governmental monitoring of the implementation process of the Action Plan should be enhanced. However.Action Plan have also determined Moldova to be more receptive. A future updating of the Action Plan should avoid as much as possible the ‘moving target’ problem. this is far to be enough. In most cases of the achievements in implementing the Action Plan it is beyond doubts that the EU-Moldova Action Plan served as a strong impetus for reforms. Moldova should go 47 . From this stand point. while considering as well as conclusions of the alternative monitoring activities performed by civil society and European institutions. as this could make unrealistic the achievement of the new policy targets during the last year of its implementation.

48 .beyond the declared objectives of the Action Plan. It has to start on its own the gradual adoption of the acquis communautaire.

083 2011 2. 2005. APPENDICES Appendix 1 Proposed appropriations for commitments for the ENPI Year €million (2004 prices) 2007 1.642 2013 3.929 Source: Smith.003 Total 2007-2013 14.877 2010 2. Appendix 2 EU neighbours and their current contractual relations with the EU Country Algeria Armenia Azerbaijan Belarus Egypt Georgia Israel Jordan Lebanon Libya Moldova Morocco Palestinian Authority Russia Syria Tunisia Ukraine Agreement Euro-Med Association Agreement Partnership and Co-operation Agreement Partnership and Co-operation Agreement Partnership and Co-operation Agreement Euro-Med Association Agreement Partnership and Co-operation Agreement Euro-Med Association Agreement Euro-Med Association Agreement Euro-Med Association Agreement None Partnership and Co-operation Agreement Euro-Med Association Agreement Interim Euro-Med Association Agreement Status Signed In force In force Signed In force In force In force In force Signed In force In force In force Date April 2002 July 1999 July 1999 March 1995 June 2004 July 1999 June 2000 May 2002 April 2002 July 1998 March 2000 July 1997 Partnership and Co-operation Agreement Euro-Med Association Agreement Euro-Med Association Agreement Partnership and Co-operation Agreement In force Signed In force In force December 1997 October 2004 March 1998 March 1998 Source: Smith.433 2008 1. 49 .322 2012 2.569 2009 1. 2005 (adapted).VII.

The Interim Agreement is also not in force 1 July 1999 1 July 1999 1 July 1999 1 July 1998 1 December 1997 Signed in May 1998 but is not yet in force.. Country Armenia Azerbaijan Belarus Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyzstan Moldova Russia Turkmenistan Ukraine Uzbekistan Entered in force 1 July 1999 1 July 1999 Signed in March 1995 but is not yet in force.Appendix 3 PCAs between the EU and. The Interim Agreement is not yet in force 1 March 1998 1 July 1999 Source: European Commission 50 ..

Enterprise policy) 2. Economics. Small and medium-sized enterprises. Civil society co-operation. Services. Public procurement. development and innovation (Transport. training and youth. Customs. Border management. Intellectual and industrial property rights. Education and training. environment. Energy. Drugs. Cross-border and regional level co-operation. Sustain growth. Financial services. Employment and social policy. Sources: EU-Moldova PCA and Action Plan . Movement of capital and current payments. Movement of persons. Regional and rural development. Sanitary and phytosanitary issues. Competition policy.6 Transport.3 Economic and social reform and development (Improve welfare. Monetary policy. Investment promotion and protection. Elimination of restrictions and streamlined administration. and address the issue of public debt. Cooperation in science and technology. conflict prevention and crisis management. Fight against organised crime. Conditions affecting the establishment and operation of companies. Monitoring. market and regulatory reform (Movement of goods: Trade relations. Money laundering financial and economic crime.5 Co-operation in Justice and Home Affairs (Migration issues. Energy. Drugs) TVIII – Cultural co-operation TIX – Financial co-operation TX – Institutional.4 Trade-related issues. consolidate public finance. technical regulations and conformity assessment procedures. General provisions) TV – Current payments and capital TVI – Competition.Appendix 4 Structure of the EU-Moldova PCA and Action Plan EU-Moldova PCA EU-Moldova Action Plan TI – General principles TII – Political dialogue TIII – Trade in goods TIV – Provisions affecting business and investment (Labour conditions: Co-ordination of social security. Tourism. Public health) 3. Environment.1 Political dialogue and reform (Democracy and the Rule of law. Information and communication. Introduction 2. Mining and raw materials. Regional co-operation) 2. including movement of workers and co-ordination of social security. Statistics. Functioning market economy. intellectual. Standards.7 People-to-people contacts (Education. Culture and audio-visual issues. Environment. Financial control and related matters. Statistical co-operation. development and innovation) 2. Co-operation on foreign and security policy. industrial and commercial property protection and legislative co-operation TVII – Economic co-operation (Industrial co-operation. Sustainable development) 2. Human rights and fundamental freedoms. energy. Public procurement. Transport. Information Society. Customs. Money laundering. Research. Financial services.2 Co-operation for the settlement of the Transnistrian conflict 2. general and final provisions. Other key areas: Taxation. and Research. Police and judicial co-operation) 2. Cross-border supply of services. Co-operation in the field of standards and conformity assessment. Postal services and telecommunications. Agriculture and the agro-industrial sector. Regional development. Social co-operation. Right of establishment and Company Law: Company law. telecommunications. Consumer protection.

The opening of one Euro-Info-Correspondence Centre (EICC) is envisaged Supporting the efficient management of migration flows. 4. and guaranteeing respect for democracy. exported or in transit Jointly identify priority industrial sectors for legislative approximation 8. 7. no. Develop EU-Moldova co-operation with regard to risk based customs control. including safety and security of goods imported. Develop a dialogue on enterprise policy aiming at the improvement of the administrative and regulatory environment for companies. Gradual abolition of restrictions to progressively allow the supply of services between the EU and Moldova in certain sectors (Ob. 74) 13.Appendix 5 EU-Moldova Action Plan objectives13 and actions No. no. 16) Effective co-operation between the EU and Moldova towards a settlement of the Transnistrian conflict within agreed formats. and to prepare engagement in post-settlement scenario EU to continue its efforts to ensure the fulfilment by Russia of the Istanbul commitments with regard to Moldova Preparation of companies for progressive opening of internal market elements to Moldovan participation. assist the efforts of the Joint Constitutional Commission. 3. no. 52 . no. financial and expert assistance to the Government of Moldova and promotion of its activities. 32) 9. including consultation on post-settlement arrangements and guarantees as appropriate Reinforce political dialogue between the EU and Moldova on the Transnistrian conflict Active engagement in the trilateral talks Moldova . at promoting industrial co-operation and tackling the impact of industrial restructuring EU to further step up its involvement in supporting the OSCE and mediators in this process. no. 23) EU support for the participation of Moldova to the South-East European Co-operation Process 2. in particular to increase professional level of relevant staff through study of foreign experience and internship in relevant services of EU countries dealing with migration policy (Ob. Objectives and actions addressed to both the EU and Moldova Objectives and actions addressed to the EU 1. also by rendering consultative. 45) Advice on Eurodac Regulation and functioning of the Eurodac system Encourage Moldova to conclude readmission agreements with the main countries of origin and transit Explore the possibility of inviting Moldova to participate in or observe the activities organised in the framework of the EU programmes on migration (ARGO.European Commission concerning measures to ensure proper management and control of Moldova’s entire border with Ukraine. Sustained efforts towards a settlement of the Transnistrian conflict. respecting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic of Moldova within its internationally recognised borders. AENEAS) Support Moldova’s integration in high level scientific exchanges (Ob. the rule of law and human rights (Ob. focusing on information and training.Ukraine . 6. in particular the Transnistrian section Strengthen dialogue and co-operation on social matters (Ob. The text in italics represents the objectives of the EU-Moldova Action Plan. 5.

12. (Ob. 11. 17. promote dialogue on industrial policy and associate Moldova to EU initiatives to stimulate competitiveness. including in the tourism sector Exchange information concerning. 56) Reinforce Moldavian participation in international Marie Curie fellowships including support of the appropriate return mechanisms Promote participation of Moldavian scientists in international debates Support exchange and study opportunities for Moldovans. the EU Member States and neighbouring countries (Ob. 16. 21. legal migration of the labour force and social protection of migrant workers as well as programmes for voluntary return and re-integration Pursue a dialogue concerning co-operation on visa policy (Ob. 43) In accordance with articles 52 and 69 of the PCA. 54) Exchange information on the existing European system (Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU)) and the existing system in Moldova as regards money laundering Intensify co-operation and promote exchange of information with corresponding services of EU Member States and specialised bodies at European level Explore the possibilities for co-operation between Moldovan agencies. no.10. no. 25. 15. 23. 47) Initiate a dialogue on readmission in the perspective of concluding a readmission agreement between Moldova and EU Setting up. 14. including to explore ways to facilitate legalisation. 13. and assess the scale of. no. Europol and Eurojust in accordance with the Europol Convention and the relevant Council decisions Further develop co-operation between Moldova and EU Member State judicial and law enforcement authorities (Ob. persons without nationality and third country nationals (Ob. management structures for legal migration. no. current situations in Member States. 19. illegal migration in the EU and Moldova Improve co-operation regarding the efficient management of migration flows and on readmission of own nationals. 20. 50) Continuation of the “Söderköping process” Strengthen efforts and co-operation in the fight against money laundering (Ob. no. 18. 48) Exchange of views on Schengen procedures and initiate a dialogue on the possibilities of visa facilitation in compliance with the acquis Dialogue and exchange of views on visa co-operation (criteria and the procedure for the issue of visas) Dialogue on document security Intensify and facilitate cross-border co-operation between Moldova. a mixed expert group to discuss legal migration to the EU. within the existing structures. 22. no. 24. in particular through their participation in the Erasmus Mundus programme Enhance Moldovan participation in the Tempus III programme Prepare for possible extension of the Tempus programme to the areas of vocational training as well as adult education 53 .

Elaborate a manual on judicial co-operation between EU Member States and Moldova and a statement of good practice in relation to such cooperation Establish a network of contact points with EU Member States law enforcement authorities to exchange information Address issues of infrastructure financing (e. 36. Possibly. 40. 29. extension of EIB lending Revision of bilateral service agreements with Member States with a view to include Community standard clauses Solution of pending issues with Member States regarding the implementation of bilateral agreements Co-operate on aviation security matters Enhance co-operation in the field of education. 38. 33. no. EIB mandate extension Continue active participation in the development of the Pan-European Corridors and Areas as well as in the TRACECA programme.g. Public/Private Partnerships. 35. no. particularly through the Youth programme Develop a dialogue on cultural diversity Promote civil society co-operation (Ob. 34. 76) Enhance youth exchanges and co-operation in the field of non-formal education for young people Increase promotion of intercultural dialogue. user charges etc.). youth exchanges and cooperation in the field of non-formal education through the Youth programme Enhance cultural co-operation (Ob. 32. 31. 78) Exchange information and technical expertise in order to facilitate participation in EU Network for the Prevention and Control of Communicable Diseases Source: EU-Moldova Action Plan 54 . 30. 37. 39. no. 28. 77) Intensify cultural exchanges giving priority to mobility of young Moldovans. shadow-tolling. 27.26. Possibly. training and youth (Ob. tolls.

(2001). http://register.shtml. Balkan states get cautious confirmation of EU entry goal.e-democracy. no. 7705/02 (Presse 91). http://www. accessed 17th May 2006.eu. Boţan.pdf. The relation between the Republic of Moldova and the European Union. no. 2. 10. 10369/03 (Presse 166). Democracy and Governing in Moldova.VIII. (2006b). (2006a).pdf. Council of the EU (2003).edemocracy. Beunderman. Chirac draws up wishlist of concrete EU projects. Internet web site for the Association ADEPT. 16th June.com. http://ue.shtml. (2006). Internet web site for the EUobserver. http://www. 58-59.eu.eu.com. 54. accessed 11th March 2006. Internet web site for the Association ADEPT. C. (2005). 26-33. Internet .md/en/e-journal/ 2006. and Barbăroşie.md/en/ comments/political/200607312. BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. 43. http://www. ADEPT (2003). 63. 14078/02.eu. 70. Internet web site for the Council of the European Union. 12. Beunderman. no. 14.int/ueDocs/cms_Data/docs/pressData/en/gena/70160. 8. 24. Sixth Meeting of the Co-operation Council between the European Union and the Republic of Moldova. 18 November. 13. Internet web site for the Association ADEPT. Internet web site for the Association ADEPT. accessed 21st June 2006. 12 November. 9. Council of the EU (2004). no.shtml. accessed 10th June 2006. http://www.com/?aid= 20998 &rk=1. 4.doc. http://ue. php?l=en&idc=32. 68.edemocracy.pdf.int/ueDocs/cms_Data/docs/press Data/en/gena/73248. http://ue. I. http://www. M. M. V. 24 February. accessed 21st June 2006. Chirilă. 47-49.md/files/Publicatii/2001/integrarea_europeana/Chirila-eng. ADEPT (2004).ipp. A. Internet web site for the Institute for Public Policy. http://www. 14183/02 (Presse 350).pdf. 78. http://euobserver. Council of the EU (2002c). 78. 2518th Meeting of the General Affairs and External Relations Council. accessed 20th May 2006. Internet web site for the Council of the European Union. ‘European integration remains a priority of the Republic of Moldova’.e-democracy. 11.md/ en/e-journal/2005. Barbăroşie. com/?aid=21106&rk=1. accessed 21st June 2006. 7. 20. 5. Internet web site for the Association ADEPT. accessed 11th August 2006.e-democracy. 15 April.ipp.md/en/e-journal/2004. accessed 20th May. New Neighbourhood Initiative – Draft Council conclusions. 3rd August 2006. http://www. Internet web site for the Institute for Public Policy. ADEPT (2006). ADEPT (2005). 16 June. EU-Moldova Action Plan and the Economic Growth and Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper: Comparative analysis. Democracy and Governing in Moldova. Democracy and Governing in Moldova.consilium. 2463rd Meeting of the General Affairs and External Relations Council. no. Internet web site for the EUobserver. accessed 11th June 2006. Democracy and Governing in Moldova. 75. Council of the EU (2002a).md/biblioteca. Council of the EU (2002b). accessed 21st June 2006.int/pdf/en/02/st14/14078en2. accessed 20th May 2006. 2421st Meeting of the General Affairs Council. 6. http://euobserver. Internet web site for the Council of the European Union. Internet web site for the Council of the European Union. accessed 27th February 2006. in ADEPT. 6295/04 (Presse 50). Democracy and Governing in Moldova.md/en/e-journal/ 20031203/#4.int/ueDocs/cms_Data/docs/press Data/en/gena/76201. 3.

27. M.consilium. Javier Solana. Internet web site for the Centre for European Policy Studies.pdf. http://iis-db. accessed 24th March 2004.php?item_id=1065. EU-Moldova Parliamentary Co-operation Committee (2005).pdf. M. pp.org. accessed 3rd June 2006.eu/ueDocs/cms_Data/docs/pressData/en/declarations/90211.uk/Phare/reports/Workshop1report. http://shop. T. G. ‘The Shaping of a Policy Framework for the Wider Europe’. 17-38.md/investigation?ID=39170. Internet web site for the Centre for European Policy Studies. 26. http://eurojournal. R.be/Article. http://shop.pdf.azi.be/BookDetail. CEPS Policy Brief.ceps. met Vladimir Voronin. (2003b). accessed 25th June 2006. Del Sarto. Internet web site for the Stanford Institute for International Studies.php?item_id=1209. accessed 5th November 2005.be/BookDetail.azi. ‘The Wider Europe as the European Union’s Friendly Monroe Doctrine’. Internet web site for the Centre for European Policy Studies. The European Neighbourhood Policy: Legal and Institutional Issues. ‘From Barcelona Process to Neighbourhood Policy. G.ceps. 220. Report on Political Dimensions of the Accession Criteria.ceps. no. http://www. accessed 7th June 2006. Internet web site for the Centre for European Policy Studies.php?item_id=1058. http://eurojournal. Emerson. CEPS Policy Brief.md/news?ID=38165. (2005). Emerson. (2004). 16. European Foreign Affairs Review. and Schumacher.ceps.php? article_id=296. (2005).php?item_id=128. M. accessed 7th June 2006. 39. accessed 26th June 2006. http://www. http://shop.web site for the Eurojournal. 22. Internet web site for the Centre for European Policy Studies.be/BookDetail. http://shop. 20. Internet web site for the for the Moldova Azi. http://www. and Noutcheva. 10. accessed 9th June 2006. M. no. (2003a). 15. Assessments and Open Issues’. ‘European Neighbourhood Policy: Strategy or Placebo?’. no. ‘From EMP to ENP: What’s at Stake with the European Neighbourhood Policy towards the Southern Mediterranean?’. Internet web site for the Council of the European Union. Deepening the Wider Europe. accessed 23rd February 2006.php?item_id=1176. Internet web site for the European Research Institute (ERI). Stanford University (USA). 22 June. Internet web site for the Centre for European Policy Studies. Comunicat de presă al Delegaţiei Comisiei Europene în Republica Moldova privind Planul de Acţiuni pentru politica de vecinătate în Europa. accessed 26th June 2006. 42. 215. http://www.edu/pubs/20738/ Cremona-ENP_and_the_Rule_of_Law. Emerson.org/files/ 79153. University of Birmingham (UK). http://shop. pdf.bham.org/files/PCC. accessed 16th August 2006. Emerson. 1. 17. (2005). Emerson. A. Workshop series ‘Assessing the Accession Criteria’. Could the EU’s ‘absorption incapacity’ permanently lock Moldova into the European Neighbourhood Policy?. CEPS Policy Brief. 19. (2002).europa. 24.be/BookDetail.ac. Dura. M.org. President of the Republic of Moldova. 18. M. no. ‘Institutionalising the Wider Europe’.eri. Internet web site for the Eurojournal.ceps. Council of the EU (2006). (2004). accessed 7th June 2006. Delegation of the European Commission to Moldova (2006).be/downfree. Eighth Meeting of the EUMoldova Parliamentary Co-operation Committee. Final Statement and Recommendations pursuant to Article 89 of the Partnership and Co-operation Agreement. Internet web site for the Moldova Azi. Emerson. M.pdf. 25. 21. CEPS Working Document. no. 23.stanford. S/168/06. http://www. ERI (2002).ceps. 56 . (2006). Cremona. no. CEPS Working Document. 27. accessed 8th June 2006. EU High Representative for the CFSP.

3. Euromonitor. Wider Europe – Neighbourhood: A New Framework for Relations with our Eastern and Southern Neighbours.europa. accessed 21st July 2006.md/files/ euromonitor02en. Internet web site for the European Commission. European Commission (2004b). accessed 21st July 2006. European Commission (2005c).europa. accessed 18th June 2006. Euromonitor.pdf 40. 19-20 June).europa. 42.europa. 22-25).e-democracy. accessed 21st June 2006. The EU’s relations with Moldova. Speech/04/529. European Commission (2005b).pdf.md/files/ euromonitor03. B. http://www. European Council in Thessaloniki (2003. European Commission (2004a). European Commission (1998).europa. accessed 17th May 2006. 32.pdf. Euromonitor. Internet web site for the Association ADEPT. VI). European Council in Copenhagen (2002. accessed 17th May 2006.eu/comm/world/enp/ pdf/action_plans/moldova_enp_ap_final_en. 1. Internet web site for the European Commission. Internet web site for the European Commission.europa. 30. Press release. EXPERT-GRUP and ADEPT (2006a). accessed 17th May 2006. (2004). http://ec. http://ec. http://ec.eu/world/enp/partners/enp_algeria_en. Internet web site for the European 57 . accessed 18th June 2006. accessed 22nd May 2006.europa. Internet web site for the European Commission. Internet web site for the European Commission.e-democracy.htm#tech. http://ec. 37. Press Conference to launch first seven Action Plans under the European Neighbourhood Policy. Presidency Conclusions (Par. 2. Paving the way for a New Neighbourhood Instrument.pdf. Internet web site for the European Commission. 41.md/files/ euromonitor01en.europa. accessed 4th August 2006. EXPERT-GRUP and ADEPT (2006c). 43. European Commission (2004d). Internet web site for the Association ADEPT. European Commission (2003b).eu/comm/world/enp/pdf/com03_ 104_en.europa.eu/world/enp/pdf/country/moldova_enp_country_report_2004_en. http://ec. http://ec. Internet web site for the Council of the European Union. Commissioner Ferrero-Waldner’s visit to Libya. 36. IP/05/609.eu/ueDocs/cms_Data/docs/pressData/en/ec/76279. 39.eu/comm/world/enp/pdf/ action_plans/ukraine_enp_ap_final_en. 35.pdf. http://www. Internet web site for the European Commission. http://www. accessed 22nd May 2006.pdf.eu/world/enp/partners/enp_libya_en. no.htm. European Commission (2004c). European Neighbourhood Policy Strategy Paper. http://ec. EU-Moldova Action Plan. no. no.eu/comm/ external_relations/ceeca/pca/pca_moldova. Partnership and Co-operation Agreement.pdf. http://ec. eu/comm/world/enp/ pdf/com03_393_en. Internet web site for the European Commission. 38. 34. EU-Ukraine Action Plan. European Commission (2005a). 29. accessed 12th July 2006.consilium. Internet web site for the European Commission. Internet web site for the Association ADEPT. Press release. accessed 22nd June 2006. http://ec.europa.e-democracy.consilium. EXPERT-GRUP and ADEPT (2006b). Internet web site for the Council of the European Union.eu/ueDocs/cms_Data/docs/pressData/en/ec/73842.eu/ comm/world/enp/pdf/strategy/strategy_paper_en. 31. 33.pdf. Commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner in Algiers.europa.28. Ferrero-Waldner. accessed 17th June 2006. Internet web site for the European Commission.htm.pdf. http://ec. http://www.eu/comm/external_ relations/moldova/intro/index. Presidency Conclusions (Ch. http://www. IP/05/790. European Commission (2003a).europa.pdf. accessed 19th June 2006.pdf.pdf. 12-13 December). European Neighbourhood Policy Country Report – Moldova.

europa. European Strategy of Moldova.ipp. Reference: IP/05/1467. Ferrero-Waldner.md/public/biblioteca/94/ro/StabMoldPEV. European Neighbourhood Policy: A year of progress. (2005b). Internet web site for the Institute for Public Policy.eu. Democracy and Governing in Moldova. accessed 17th May 2006.do?reference=SPEECH/05/658&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLan guage=en 47. Internet web site for the European Commission. 46.e-democracy. nr.pdf.int/rapid/pressReleasesAction. 49. no.do?reference=SPEECH/05/797&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN &guiLanguage=en.Commission. B.int/comm/external_ relations/news/ferrero/2004/sp04_529.doc. Internet web site for the European Commission.int/rapid/pressReleasesAction. 3 July. (2005b).09. http://www. EU-Moldova Action Plan: Negotiations and Implementation. Ferrero-Waldner. B.int/rapid/press ReleasesAction. in ADEPT. Gheorghiu. Internet web site for the European Commission. accessed 2nd March 2006.eu. (2005a). accessed 10th June 2006.eu. http://www. (2005e).doc. 51. Gheorghiu.htm. accessed 17th January 2006. Speech/05/797.doc.ipp. 44. (2003a). accessed 2nd March 2006.md/public/biblioteca/48/en/Moldova~neighbour~EU. Internet web site for the Institute for Public Policy. (2005c). of the Republic of Moldova (2005a). Gheorghiu. http://www. 88. Gov. accessed 10th June 2006. Internet web site for the Association ADEPT. Quo Vadis Europa?. (2005a). Internet web site for the Institute for Public Policy. Ferrero-Waldner.md/en/e-journal/20030507/# 21.europa. Europe’s Neighbours – Towards Closer Integration. http://europa. accessed 2nd March 2006.int/rapid/pressReleases Action.doc. 53. 54. B.ipp.europa. Ferrero-Waldner. Internal Report on Semestrial Evaluation of the EU-Moldova Action Plan Implementation 2005. Gheorghiu. Internet web site for the Institute for Public Policy. Stabilizarea Republicii Moldova – vecinătate sau asociere la UE. 52. http://www. http://www. Flux (2006). http://www. http://www. V. accessed 25th June 2006. V. Internet web site for the Institute for Public Policy. Moldova: drepturile omului nu se respectă. V.md/public/biblioteca/68/ro/ EurStratMold. B. accessed 2nd March 2006. 45. B. accessed 10th June 2006. 50. (2003b).do?reference=IP/05/ 1467&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en. The European Neighbourhood Policy: helping ourselves through helping our neighbours. V. ‘Moldova – future EU neighbour or member?’. (2003c). http://www. accessed 2nd March 2006. Internet web site for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European Integration of the Republic of Moldova. 48. Internet web site for the European Commission. Internet web site for the European Commission.ipp.md/En/EurInteg/Documents/Raport%2012. accessed 25th May 2006. Speech/05/658. http://www. Ferrero-Waldner.eu.htm. http://europa. Strengthening the partnership between the EU and its neighbours.2005%20eng%20rev %20integral. 6.europa. Moldova – Unwelcome Neighbour of the European Union. 55.eu. Speech/05/586.ipp. 58 . V. (2005c). Speech/05/253. Gheorghiu.eu.mfa. 56.md/public/biblioteca/83/en/MoldovaWayEU.do?reference=SPEECH/05/ 586&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en.pdf. V. http://www. Gheorghiu. (2005d). accessed 10th June 2006.int/comm/external_relations/news/ferrero/2005/sp05_253. http://www. Moldova on the way to the European Union: Distance covered and next steps to be done.md/public/biblioteca/92/en/Yerevan272.

php?l=en&id =85.org. (2001). accessed 25th June 2006. 240-247. Politica Europeană de Vecinătate.mfa. The EU. Internet web site for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European Integration of the Republic of Moldova. pp. http://www.doc. Gov. S. Mediterranean Politics. Lavenex. of the Republic of Moldova (2005b). Journal of European Public Policy. accessed 26th May 2006.mfa. European Foreign Policy Research Network. accessed 26th May 2006. accessed 26th May 2006. Internet web site for the Independent Journalism Centre (IJC). S.html. 64. International Affairs. 69. R. (2000).. European Strategy of the Republic Moldova. 11(4). (2004).ijc.pdf. 61. and Löwenhardt.html. of the Republic of Moldova (2006b).pdf.md/Ro/IntegEur/Home_DIE. 62. MFAEI (2005).fornet. Program Naţional de Implementare a Planului de Acţiuni RM-UE. accessed 16th May 2006. Internet web site for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European Integration of the Republic of Moldova. Raport al Guvernului Republicii Moldova privind implementarea Planului de Acţiuni Republica Moldova – Uniunea Europeană (ianuarie-martie 2006). Gov.57. J. 60. 68. pp. accessed 21st April 2006. of the Republic of Moldova (2006c). accessed 26th May 2006. Reuniunea a VII a Consiliului de Cooperare Republica Moldova – Uniunea Europeană. http://www. 58.mfa. http://eurojournal. MFAEI (2004). International Affairs.eu.pdf. Raport anual. Internet web site for the ‘FORNET’. http://www. 65. accessed 20th May 2006. Löwenhardt.mfa. Landaburu. 70.md/Ro/IntegEur/Documente/Raport%20anual%202005.pdf.md/biblioteca1. IPP (2006). ‘EU external governance in wider Europe’. 77-88. White.md/Ro/IntegEur/relatii%20RM_UE. Internet web site for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European Integration of the Republic of Moldova.md/En/EurInteg/ Documents/RAPORT%20aug-octob2005.info/documents/FORNET%20 Plenary%2005%20Moldova%20Backgroundpaper. http://europa. Gov.pdf. Lynch. (2004). Russia and the European Neighbourhood Policy: The Case of Moldova.md/serviciul_juridic/docs/RAPORT_ANUAL_2005. J. Libertatea de exprimare şi informare în Republica Moldova. 76(1).mfa. ‘A wider Europe: the view from Minsk and Chisinau’. The European Neighbourhood Policy. 67.. Internet web site for the Eurojournal.pdf. Haukkala. Raport anual al Guvernului Republicii Moldova privind implementarea Planului de Acţiuni Republica Moldova – Uniunea Europeană (februarie-decembrie 2005). http://www.ipp. http://www. http://www. pp. 77(3). Internet web site for the European Commission. Hill.int/comm/world/enp/pdf/060223_el_ceps_en. (2006). 605-620. accessed 28th May 2006. Gov. D. 63. (2005). and Light. http://www. http://www. J. E. Internet web site for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European Integration of the Republic of Moldova. From Neighbourhood to Integration Policy: are there concrete alternatives to enlargement?.md/Ro/IntegEur/Documente/RAPORT%20trimestru%20I%20-%202006 %20-%20FINAL. ‘A wider Europe: the view from Moscow and Kyiv’. Internet web site for the Institute for Public Policy. of the Republic of Moldova (2006a). accessed 23rd May 2006.org/files/dov_prague. 71. Internet web site for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European 59 .ro. E. 59. M. (2004). H. 2006-2007 (Draft). Internet web site for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European Integration of the Republic of Moldova. 66. Light. IJC (2005). Report of the Government of the Republic of Moldova on the Implementation of the EU-Moldova Action Plan (August-October 2005). ‘A Ring of Friends? The implications of the European Neighbourhood Policy for the Mediterranean’. Johansson-Nogués. pp. 680-700. 9(2). M.

Speech/02/619.int/rapid/pressReleasesAction. 75. in Green Cowles. J. Prodi. accessed 22nd May 2006.europa. (1996). Internet web site for the European Commission. Internet web site for the European Commission. Smith. Internet web site for the International Policy Fellowships program. A Wider Europe: A Proximity Policy as the Key to Stability. accessed 23rd February 2006. and Dinan. Comisia Europeană este mulţumită de implementarea Planului de Acţiuni RM-UE. pp.org/stiri/rom/9993/. http://www. 72. http://www.osce. Moldpres (2006).org/documents/ odihr/2005/06/14919_en.eu/uedocs/cmsUpload/78367. J. Florence. (2005). ‘Theorising the European Neighbourhood Policy: Debordering and Rebordering in the Mediterranean’.moldova. http://ec. 5-28. 86. 34. Internet web site for the OSCE Mission to Moldova.org. The EU and South Caucasus: Learning lessons from Moldova and Ukraine. G. Oudenaren.pdf. 81(4). EU High Representative for the CFSP.eu/comm/world/enp/pdf/10-11_kyiv_cp_speech_en. RSCAS no. Internet web site for the Centre for 60 . Solana. K. Republic of Moldova: Parliamentary Elections 6 March 2005. (2006). pp. 74. 77.md (2006). http://www.eu.org/stiri/rom/9975/. accessed 14th June 2006. Internet web site Moldova. 79. (eds. Enlarging Europe: Which Format and Which Architecture?. http://ec. accessed 3rd March 2006. http://www.pdf. 80. Internet web site for the European Commission. (2003). V. accessed 26th June 2006. accessed 23rd February 2006. Geopolitics.do?reference=SPEECH/04/332&for mat=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en.hu/npopescu/publications/caucasus. 256-274. Patten.pdf. OSCE/ ODIHR Election Observation Mission Final Report.pdf. http://politicom. Basingstoke. EUI Working Papers. J. Internet web site Moldova. pp.mfa. Remarks of Javier Solana. A Secure Europe in a Better World – European Security Strategy.int/ueDocs/cms_Data/ docs/pressdata/en/discours/87379. (2005). M. Internet web site for the Council of the EU.). accessed 4th June 2006. Speech/04/332. N. in CSSR. Popescu. accessed 26th June 2006. International Affaires. Scott.it/RSCAS/WP-Texts/05_34. J. D. R. 76. http://ue. Smith. http://www. 83. Solana. (2005). Internet web site for the European University Institute. 10. (2005). Potočnik. UE se aşteaptă la acţiuni mai eficiente din partea Chişinăului în realizarea Planului de Acţiuni.policy. 2nd. Year 2005 – Economy: Analytical Notes. OSCE/ ODIHR (2005). 429-454.htm. (2002). ‘From Partnership and Co-operation Agreement to Action Plan’. accessed 24th February 2006. pp. (2005).moldova. 73. S. ‘The outsiders: The European neighbourhood policy’. (2004). C. at the Launch of the EU Border Mission for Moldova-Ukraine. Speech/398/05. http://politicom. http://www.Integration of the Republic of Moldova. 78. 34(1).iue. (2003). (2004). The ‘Wider Europe – New Neighbourhood’ Initiative: An Opportunity for Co-operation along the Enlarged Union’s Borders. 10 November 2003. W. Reporter.europa.pdf.europa. Stetter.eu. 81. M. Journal of Common Market Studies. Şelari.pdf. Speech at the ministerial meeting in Kyiv.htm. 757-773. ‘The European Union and a Changing Europe: Establishing the Boundaries of Order’. E. ‘Policy Towards the Extended Frontier: The Balkans and the Newly Independent States’. Internet web site for the Council of the EU. md/Ro/Comunicate/2005-02-24ReuniuneaConsiliuluiCooperareRM_UE. J. accessed 25th June 2006.europa. ‘The EU and Wider Europe: Toward an Alternative Geopolitics of Regional Co-operation?. 85.org.eu/comm/external_relations/news/prodi/sp02_619. consilium. Developments in the European Union. 84. 82. Macmillan. accessed 24th June 2006.

Strategic Studies and Reforms. Internet web site for the European Commission. EUI Working Papers. accessed 25th June 2006. accessed 11th June 2006. Speech/04/141. accessed 24th June 2006. 87. 91. 90. no. Internet web site for the European Union. G. G. The European Neighbourhood Policy. http://europa.cisrmd. I-57. Internet web site for the Institute for Public Policy. accessed 9th June 2006.doc.pdf. Vahl. Tocci. RSCAS no.eu. (2004). Internet web site for the Centre for European Policy Studies. 29. accessed 18th February 2006. http://www. Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (2004). The European Economic Area and the Northern Dimension’. ‘Models for the European Neighbourhood Policy. Verheugen.html.do?reference=SPEECH/04/141&format=HTML&aged=0&lan guage=EN&guiLanguage=fr. 61 . 88.ipp.int/ rapid/pressReleasesAction. (2003).htm.ceps. 89. http://www. N. http://www. http://shop. The European Neighbourhood Initiative: An Opportunity for Enhanced Co-operation EU-Moldova.int/eur-lex/lex/en/treaties/ index. Internet web site for the European University Institute. Florence. M.md/public/biblioteca/67/en/AlocVerhEngl. accessed 3rd July 2006.it/RSCAS/WP-Texts/04_29. 218. Verheugen.iue.be/BookDetail.org/reports/Notes%202005/note3. CEPS Working Document.php?item_id=1192. (2005). Art. (2004). ‘Conflict Resolution in the European Neighbourhood: The Role of the EU as a Framework and as an Actor’. http://europa.eu.